National Courts as Gatekeepers in EU Legal Integration: Supporting EU Legal Integration, Protecting National Law or Balancing Conflicting Demands?

Whether national courts are to be understood as supporters of EU legal integration or defenders of member state sovereignty remains contested. To shed new light on this debate, the present paper examines the national courts’ two key choices in the preliminary ruling procedure, both of which have important implications for the integration process: (1) the supply of request for preliminary rulings - whether national courts allow the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) to decide cases with a high degree of political sensitivity, and (2) the framing of the requests - whether national courts express opinions supporting national law or EU law in the cases referred to the CJEU. The paper shows that the single most common court behavior is to support legal integration by referring politically sensitive cases and express support for EU law. However, by examining the choices together the study uncovers two previously un-theorized national court behaviors: compatibility defended and access contained. These findings have implications for the debate on the role of national courts in EU legal integration. Contrary to the claims in previous research, the results show that national court behavior is not limited to either supporting further legal integration or defending national legislation. Instead, it is argued that national courts may contribute to strike a balance between EU integration and member state autonomy.