Abstract: European Union (EU) integration prompted a reconceptualization of citizenship that rests in the tension between the national and the supranational, and the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) plays a crucial role in this process. EU integration fundamentally changed traditional understandings of sovereign borders and national citizenship, creating a framework in which states do not hold the sole power to determine who crosses and remains lawfully within its borders, or claims access to social benefits. Scholars generally agree that the CJEU makes decisions with bounded discretion and have identified mechanisms by which its rulings are constrained. Our paper builds on this literature to explain the content of CJEU opinions in this salient area of law. We investigate the language employed by the CJEU in cases involving a fundamental right associated with EU citizenship, the freedom to move and reside, and ask whether the Court strategically alters its language in response to the political and economic context. We argue that the CJEU crafts its language in anticipation of the political ramifications of its decisions. Our findings have important implications for the debate concerning the impact of the CJEU in European integration and, more generally, in the reconceptualization of borders and citizenship across the globe.
REGISTER to receive zoom link and paper.