The American Influence on EU Law: Similarities and Differences in Legal Orders on Both Sides of the Atlantic Ocean
Abstract
Some of the legal institutions that operate in European law today derive from North American legislation and its administrative structures. However, not everything is a copy nor do they work in the same way on both continents. At the constitutional level, there is a strong convergence with or influence of the US model in the EU, since both use commerce as a tool for integration. In contrast, at the administrative level, there is notable divergence, as the EU adopts an indirect administrative model under which member states are responsible for enforcing supranational policies. Paradoxically, supranational European integration offers a lower level of autonomy for member states than would have been guaranteed by a United States of Europe.
Keywords
federalism, European integration, commerce clause, supremacy, preemption, administrative commandeering, enforcement of federal policiesReferences
AMAR, V. D. (2018). «“Clarifying” Murphy’s Law: Did Something Go Wrong in Reconciling Commandeering and Conditional Preemption Doctrines?». Supreme Court Review, 299-346. https://doi.org/10.1086/703561
ARENA, A. (2018). «The twin principles of primacy and preemption». Oxford Principles of European Union Law, I, 300-348.
BALLBÉ, M. (1998). «La Administración Hueca». El Periódico (16 de octubre).
BALLBÉ, M. (2007). «El futuro del Derecho administrativo en la globalización: entre la americanización y la europeización». Revista de Administración Pública, 174.
BALLBÉ, M. y MARTÍNEZ, R. (2003). Soberanía dual y Constitución integradora: La reciente doctrina federal de la Corte Suprema norteamericana. Barcelona: Ariel.
BALLBÉ, M. y PADRÓS, C. (1997). Estado competitivo y armonización europea: Los modelos norteamericano y europeo de integración. Barcelona: Ariel.
BARNETT, R. E. (2001). «The Original Meaning of the Commerce Clause». University of Chicago Law Review, 68, 101.
BERMANN, G. A. (1995). «European Community Law from a US Perspective». Tulane Journal of International and Comparative Law, 4.
BORRAJO INIESTA, I. (1986). Federalismo y unidad económica: La cláusula de comercio de la Constitución de EE.UU. Madrid: INAP.
BUCHANAN, J. M. (1993). «Una perspectiva americana de la oportunidad constitucional de Europa». Hacienda Pública Española, 124.
CAPPELLETTI, M. (1985). «Foreword». En: Integration Through Law, vol. I, libro 1. Nueva York.
CASES PALLARÉS, L. (1995). Derecho administrativo de la defensa de la competencia. Madrid: Marcial Pons.
CASSESE, S. (1991). «Il sistema amministrativo europeo e la sua evoluzione». Rivista Trimestrale di Diritto Pubblico, 1991/3.
COLE, D. H. y COMER, C. S. (1997). «Rhetoric, Reality, and the Law of Unfunded Federal Mandates». Stanford Law and Policy Review, 8.
CONGRESSIONAL RESEARCH SERVICE (2019). Report: 45825. Federal Prremption: A Legal Primer. July 2019. Disponible en https://sgp.fas.org/crs/misc/R45825.pdf.
COOTER, R. D. y SIEGEL, N. S. (2010). «Collective Action Federalism: A General Theory of Article I, Section 8». Stanford Law Review, 63(1).
CROSS, E. D. (1992). «Preemption of membre State law in the European Economic Community: A framework for analysis». Common Market Law Review, 29(3), 447-472.
CURTIN, D. (1993). «The constitutional structure of the Union: A Europe of bits and pieces». Common Market Law Review, 30(1).
CURTIN, D. (2020). «From a Europe of bits and pieces to a union of variegated differentiation». EUI Working Paper, EUI RSCAS, 2020/37, European Governance and Politics Programme. Disponible en https://cadmus.eui.eu/handle/1814/67047.
ELAZAR, Daniel J. (1965). «The Shaping of Intergovernmental Relations in the Twentieth Century». The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, 359(1), 10-22. https://doi.org/10.1177/000271626535900103
ESTELLA DE NORIEGA, A. (2000). «La Administración pública comunitaria». En: AA. VV. Manual de Derecho Administrativo Comunitario. Madrid: Centro de Estudios Ramón Areces.
GARDBAUM, S. A. (1994). «The Nature of Preemption». Cornell Law Review, 79(4).
GIL IBÁÑEZ, A. (2000). «El déficit de aplicación administrativa del Derecho comunitario: Características, principales causas y algunas posibles soluciones». En: QUADRA SALCEDO, T. de la y ESTELLA DE NORIEGA, A. Problemas de legitimación en la Europa de la Unión: Las respuestas del Tratado de Amsterdam. Madrid: BOE y UCIII.
GUTIÉRREZ-FONS, J. A. (2014). «Transatlantic adjudication techniques: The Commerce Clause and the EU’s internal market harmonization clause in perspective». En: FAHEY, Elaine y CURTIN, Deirdre (eds.). A Transatlantic Community of Law: Legal perspectives of the relationship between EU and US legal orders. Cambridge UP, 69-101.
HAIBACH, G. (1999). «The interpretation of article 30 of the EC Treaty and de “dormant” commerce clause by the European Court of Justice and the US Supreme Court». International and Comparative Law Quarterly, 48(1).
KINCAID, J. (1991). «The competitive challenge to cooperative federalism: A theory of federal democracy». En: D. A. KENYON y J. KINCAID. Competition among states and local governments. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute Press.
MARTIN, C. R. (1992). «Preemption if the Age of Local Regulatory Innovation: Fitting the formula to a diferent kind of conflicte». Texas Law Review, 70(7), 1841.
MIGUEL ASENSIO, P. A. de (2006). «Diversidad jurídica y unidad de mercado: El sistema federal de EEUU y la Unión Europea». Revista Mexicana de Derecho Internacional Privado y Comparado, 20, 41-69. Disponible en https://eprints.ucm.es/id/eprint/6904/.
MONNET, J. (1985). Memorias. Madrid: Banco Hispano-Americano. Club Siglo XXI. Prólogo de Felipe González Márquez.
MORENO MOLINA, A. M. (2000). «La Administración pública de los Estados Miembros como Administración comunitaria: Referencia a la situación española». En: AA. VV. Manual de Derecho Administrativo Comunitario. Madrid: Centro de Estudios Ramón Areces.
NORTHROP, Patricia T. (1997). «The constitutional insignificance of funding for federal mandates». Duke Law Journal, 46, 903-930.
PARSONS, C. y SMITH, A. (2022). «The ‘completeness’ of the EU single market in comparison to the United States». Single Market Economy Papers 2022. Disponible en https://single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu/publications/completeness-eu-single-market-comparison-united-states_en.
POIARES MADURO, M. (2002). We the Court: The European Court of Justice and the European economic constitution. Oxford: Hart Publishing.
REICH, N. (1992). «Competition among legal orders: A new paradigm of EC Law?». Common Market Law Review, 29(1).
SANDALOW, S. y STEIN, E. (eds.) (1982). Courts and Free Markets: Perspectives from the United States and Europe. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
SCHNEIDER, J. P. (2008). «Estructuras de la Unión administrativa europea». En: F. VELASCO CABALLERO y J. P. SCHNEIDER (2008). La unión administrativa europea. Madrid: Marcial Pons, 30-32.
SCHÜTZE, R. (2006). «Supremacy without pre-emption?: The very slowly emergent doctrine of Community pre-emption». Common Market Law Review, 43(4), 1023-1048.
STABILE, S. J. (1995). «Preemption of State Law by Federal Law: A task for Congress or the Courts». Vilanova Law Review, 40(1).
TRACHTMAN, J. P. (1993). «International Regulatory Competition, Externalization and Jurisdiction». Harvard International Law Journal, 34(1).
VELASCO CABALLERO, F. y SCHNEIDER, J. P. (2008). La unión administrativa europea. Madrid: Marcial Pons.
WEILER, J. H. H. (1991). «The transformation of Europe». Yale Law Journal, 100.
WEILER, J. H. H. (1995). «Does Europe Need a Constitution?: Demos, Telos and the German Maastricht Decision». European Law Journal, 1(3).
YOUNG, E. (2002). «Protecting Member State Autonomy in the European Union: Some Cautionary Tales from American Federalism». New York University Law Review, 77(1).
Published
Downloads
Copyright (c) 2023 Carlos Padrós Reig
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
