(Ebook) Democracy's guardians : a history of the

German Federal Constitutional Court, 1951-2001 by

Collings, Justin ISBN 9780198753377, 0198753373 Pdf
Download

https://ebooknice.com/product/democracy-s-guardians-a-history-of-
the-german-federal-constitutional-court-1951-2001-5892644

★★★★★
4.9 out of 5.0 (77 reviews )

Instant PDF Download

ebooknice.com
 (Ebook) Democracy's guardians : a history of the German
Federal Constitutional Court, 1951-2001 by Collings, Justin
ISBN 9780198753377, 0198753373 Pdf Download

EBOOK

Available Formats

■ PDF eBook Study Guide Ebook

EXCLUSIVE 2025 EDUCATIONAL COLLECTION - LIMITED TIME

INSTANT DOWNLOAD VIEW LIBRARY

Here are some recommended products for you. Click the link to
download, or explore more at ebooknice.com

(Ebook) Biota Grow 2C gather 2C cook by Loucas, Jason; Viles,

James ISBN 9781459699816, 9781743365571, 9781925268492,
1459699815, 1743365578, 1925268497

https://ebooknice.com/product/biota-grow-2c-gather-2c-cook-6661374

(Ebook) Matematik 5000+ Kurs 2c Lärobok by Lena Alfredsson, Hans

Heikne, Sanna Bodemyr ISBN 9789127456600, 9127456609

https://ebooknice.com/product/matematik-5000-kurs-2c-larobok-23848312

(Ebook) SAT II Success MATH 1C and 2C 2002 (Peterson's SAT II

Success) by Peterson's ISBN 9780768906677, 0768906679

https://ebooknice.com/product/sat-ii-success-math-1c-and-2c-2002-peterson-
s-sat-ii-success-1722018

(Ebook) Cambridge IGCSE and O Level History Workbook 2C - Depth

Study: the United States, 1919-41 2nd Edition by Benjamin
Harrison ISBN 9781398375147, 9781398375048, 1398375144,
1398375047
https://ebooknice.com/product/cambridge-igcse-and-o-level-history-
workbook-2c-depth-study-the-united-states-1919-41-2nd-edition-53538044
(Ebook) Constitutional Courts in Comparison : The US Supreme
Court and the German Federal Constitutional Court by Ralf
Rogowski; Thomas Gawron ISBN 9781785330964, 1785330969

https://ebooknice.com/product/constitutional-courts-in-comparison-the-us-
supreme-court-and-the-german-federal-constitutional-court-51476850

(Ebook) Master SAT II Math 1c and 2c 4th ed (Arco Master the SAT
Subject Test: Math Levels 1 & 2) by Arco ISBN 9780768923049,
0768923042

https://ebooknice.com/product/master-sat-ii-math-1c-and-2c-4th-ed-arco-
master-the-sat-subject-test-math-levels-1-2-2326094

(Ebook) A history of the Federal Reserve, volume I, 1913-1951 by

Meltzer, Allan H ISBN 9780226519999, 0226519996

https://ebooknice.com/product/a-history-of-the-federal-reserve-
volume-i-1913-1951-5259318

(Ebook) A History of the Federal Reserve, Volume 2, Book 1,

1951-1969 by Allan H. Meltzer ISBN 9780226520018, 0226520013

https://ebooknice.com/product/a-history-of-the-federal-reserve-
volume-2-book-1-1951-1969-1728394

(Ebook) Airplane Flying Handbook: FAA-H-8083-3A by Federal

Aviation Administration ISBN 9781560275572, 156027557X

https://ebooknice.com/product/airplane-flying-handbook-
faa-h-8083-3a-1399456
DE MO C R AC Y ’ S GUA R DI A NS
 Democracy’s Guardians
A History of the German Federal Constitutional Court
1951–2001

J US T I N C OL L I NG S
Brigham Young University

1
 1
Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP,
United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford.
It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship,
and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of
Oxford University Press in the UK and in certain other countries
© J. Collings 2015
The moral rights of the author‌have been asserted
First Edition published in 2015
Impression: 1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in
a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the
prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted
by law, by licence or under terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics
rights organization. Enquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the
above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the
address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form
and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer
Crown copyright material is reproduced under Class Licence
Number C01P0000148 with the permission of OPSI
and the Queen’s Printer for Scotland
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2015945189
ISBN 978–0–19–875337–7
Printed and bound by
CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY
Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and
for information only. Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials
contained in any third party website referenced in this work.
 For Lia
‘… because you are to me the chief woman in the world—the throned lady whose
colours I carry between my heart and my armor.’
—Daniel Deronda
 Acknowledgements

This book began as a dissertation submitted to the history department of Yale University.
Perhaps someone, somewhere, sometime has had as fine a dissertation committee as I, but
I rather doubt it. Adam Tooze, my advisor, has been an inexhaustible fount of encourage-
ment, energy, and ideas. For nearly a decade, Bruce Ackerman has been a consummate
teacher and mentor, forever pushing me to do better and to think bigger. Jay Winter is
an exquisite gentleman, a magnificent teacher, and a warm human being—a friend and
guide since my first day of graduate school. Dieter Grimm has been wondrously kind to
an American interloper writing about the Court he once served so ably. All four are giants
in their fields—powerful thinkers, lucid writers, captivating teachers, committed citizens.
They have been models for me as well as mentors. I hope, in my scholarly life, to repay them
by emulation.
This project was interrupted for a year while I worked as a law clerk for the Honorable
Guido Calabresi, another supreme mentor and one of the truly great ones of the earth. My
co-clerks, Farah Peterson and Brian Soucek, blessed me with their wisdom, friendship, and
encouragement. This book, and indeed my whole life, is richer for that experience.
Some of the historical material in Chapter 1 appeared previously in German in an essay
called ‘Gerhard Leibholz und der Status des Bundesverfassungsgerichts. Karriere eines
Berichts und seines Berichterstatters,’ in a collection edited by Anna-Bettina Kaiser and
entitled Der Parteienstaat. Zum Staatsverstӓndnis von Gerhard Leibholz (Nomos 2013).
I thank the Nomos publishing house for permission to reproduce that material here.
I wish to thank the gracious and gifted archivists and librarians of the Staatsbibliothek
zu Berlin, the Bundesarchiv in Koblenz, the Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung in Bonn, the
Hans-Seidel-Stiftung in Munich, and the Landesarchiv Baden-Württemberg in Stuttgart.
The Fox International Fellowship, under the aegis of the MacMillan Center at Yale, gener-
ously sponsored my research in Germany during the 2011–12 academic year. I also wish
to thank Frau Marianne Leibholz for permission to examine the personal papers of her
father, Justice Gerhard Leibholz. Galen Fletcher, Kory Staheli, Dianne Davenport, Dennis
Sears, and other librarians at BYU Law School have been skilled and supportive. Adam Ott,
Janet Lawrence, Alexandra Thomas Sandvik, Amy West, and Whitney Nelson provided
invaluable help as I prepared the manuscript for publication. Several colleagues at BYU
read parts of this book and gave helpful feedback. Donald Kommers, the dean of German
constitutional studies, graciously read and responded to the entire manuscript. Mitchel
Lasser, my friend and former teacher, deserves recognition both for inspiring me to become
a comparative constitutionalist and for helping to get this book published.
Alex Flach and Elinor Shields of Oxford University Press have been gracious and helpful
at every step of the publication process. Ambiga Jayakumar and others have done excep-
tional copy-editorial and production work.
My largest thanks go to my family. Our daughters, Julia, Elisabeth, and Katharine,
endured this project patiently from beginning to end. Julia and Eli even put up with a year
in German schools while I did the bulk of the research and writing. Abdiel and Gwyndelin
joined our family while my dissertation was becoming a book. I’ve been asked many times
how I survived law school, graduate school, the job market, and my first year of teaching
with so many small children. In fact, I could never have survived without them. On my
darkest days they gave me a hero’s welcome when I came home. They have stirred my soul
viii Acknowledgements

with their childlike belief that their daddy could do anything—even write the history of the
German Constitutional Court.
I have neither the space nor the power to thank adequately my wife, Lia. I hope my life can
be my gratitude. For now, she will have to settle for the dedication of this book, which, like
its author, would be nothing at all without her.
 Contents

Table of Cases xi
Prologue: The View from 1949 xv
Introduction xxix

1. Consolidation, 1951–1959 1
Introduction 1
I. Institutional Independence 5
II. Judicial Politics 14
III. Judicial Supremacy and the Politics of the Past 28
IV. Militant Democracy and Its Discontents 38
V. The Quiet Birth of Fundamental Rights 49
Conclusion 61

2. Confidence, 1959–1971 63
Introduction 63
I. Adenauer’s Last Stand 67
II. The Party State 80
III. The State of Exception 98
Conclusion 103

3. Confrontation, 1971–1982 109

Introduction 109
I. Departure of the Giants 114
II. Fundamental Rights 117
III. Political Justice 126
IV. Changing of the Guard 164
V. Crisis 167
Conclusion 180

4. Continuity, 1982–1990 183

Introduction 183
I. High (Constitutional) Politics 185
II. Fundamental Rights in Shades of Green 207
III. The Largest Turnover in the Court’s History 217
IV. The German Question on the Eve of Reunification 219

5. Karlsruhe Republic, 1990–2001 223

Introduction 223
I. The German Question 231
II. Bio-Politics and Social Policy 248
III. Freedom of Conscience and Expression 256
IV. Germany and the World 274
Conclusion 284
x Contents

Epilogue: The View from Europe 291

I. The Lisbon Judgment 292
II. The Watchdog Begins to Growl 298
III. Final Reflections 301

Selected Bibliography 307

Index 323
 Table of Cases

F E DE R A L C ONST I T U T IONA L C OU RT
1 BVerfGE 1 (1951). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . 5
1 BVerfGE 14 (1951) (Southwest State). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . 5, 33
1 BVerfGE 117 (1952). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
1 BVerfGE 167 (1952). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . 31
1 BVerfGE 208 (1952) (7.5% hurdle) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . 92
1 BVerfGE 351 (1951) (Petersberg Treaty) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . 15
1 BVerfGE 372 (1951) (German-French Economic Agreement). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . 15
1 BVerfGE 396 (1952) (Germany Treaty). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . 15
2 BVerfGE 1 (1952) (SRP Party Ban). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25, 38–40, 92
2 BVerfGE 79 (1952) (EDC Advisory Opinion I) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
2 BVerfGE 105 (1952) (EDC Advisory Opinion II). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
2 BVerfGE 143 (1953) (European Defence Treaty). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . 23
2 BVerfGE 237 (1953). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . 31
2 BVerfGE 347 (1953). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ 27
3 BVerfGE 58 (1953) (Civil Servants) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . 29–38, 147, 235
3 BVerfGE 225 (1953) (Gender Equality I). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . 52, 54, 255
4 BVerfGE 27 (1954). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . 92
4 BVerfGE 144 (1955). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ 162
4 BVerfGE 157 (1955) (Saar Statute) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . 27
4 BVerfGE 358 (1955). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ 34
5 BVerfGE 85 (1956) (Communist Party Ban). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . 43, 54, 92
6 BVerfGE 32 (1957) (Elfes) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . xxxii, 50, 54, 62
6 BVerfGE 55 (1957). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57, 153
6 BVerfGE 84 (1957). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
6 BVerfGE 222 (1957) (Gestapo) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . 37
6 BVerfGE 290 (1957) (Washington Agreement). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
6 BVerfGE 367 (1957) (Reich Concordat). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . 92
6 BVerfGE 389 (1956) (Homosexuals) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51, 53, 122
7 BVerfGE 198 (1958) (Lüth) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxxii, 54–61, 62–64, 87, 126, 209, 272
7 BVerfGE 377 (1958) (Pharmacy). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . 60
8 BVerfGE 51 1. (1958) (Party Finance I). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91, 94
8 BVerfGE 104 (1958) (Atomic Plebiscite I). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
8 BVerfGE 122 (1958) (Atomic Plebiscite II). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
10 BVerfGE 59 (1959) (Gender Equality II). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53, 255
10 BVerfGE 118 (1959). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
11 BVerfGE 239 (1960). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92
12 BVerfGE 36 (1960) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ 71
12 BVerfGE 205 (1961) (Television I). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68–80, 85, 103, 106–107, 122 n69, 157, 170, 183, 287
12 BVerfGE 276 1. (1961). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . 92, 94
17 BVerfGE 337 (1964). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
18 BVerfGE 34 (1964) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
20 BVerfGE 9 (1966) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ 93
20 BVerfGE 56 (1966) (Party Finance II A). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . 90–98, 106, 140, 168
20 BVerfGE 119 (1966) (Party Finance II B). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .90–98
20 BVerfGE 134 (1966) (Party Finance II C). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90–98
xii Table of Cases

20 BVerfGE 150 (1966) (Public Assembly Law). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90

20 BVerfGE 162 (1966) (Spiegel Affair). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80–82, 85–90, 101, 215
23 BVerfGE 98 (1968) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
24 BVerfGE 300 (1968) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96
25 BVerfGE 167 (1969) (Nonmarital children). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
25 BVerfGE 269 (1969) (statute of limitations for Nazi crimes). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64
30 BVerfGE 1 (1970) (Emergency Laws). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100–03, 106–07, 212, 214
30 BVerfGE 173 (1971) (Mephisto). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 118–22, 124
30 BVerfGE 292 (1971). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132
31 BVerfGE 145 (1971). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146
32 BVerfGE 54 (1971). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153
32 BVerfGE 157 (1971). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
33 BVerfGE 1 (1972) (Rights of Prisoners). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124–25, 158
33 BVerfGE 125 (1972) (Medical Licensing). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125–26, 158
33 BVerfGE 195 (1972). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
33 BVerfGE 232 (1972). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136
33 BVerfGE 303 (1972) (Numerus Clausus). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127–30, 132, 134, 158
34 BVerfGE 160 (1972) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
34 BVerfGE 341 (1973) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122
35 BVerfGE 79 (1973) (university governance). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130–34, 155, 157 n321, 158
35 BVerfGE 193 (1973). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139
35 BVerfGE 202 (1973) (Lebach Murders). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122–24
35 BVerfGE 246 (1973) (Basic Treaty Injunction I). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
35 BVerfGE 257 (1973) (Basic Treaty Injunction II). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
35 BVerfGE 366 (1973) (Crucifix in the Courtroom). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 261
36 BVerfGE 1 (1973) (Basic Treaty). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134–44, 148, 157 n321, 178, 205, 220–21, 236, 280
37 BVerfGE 84 (1974). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168
37 BVerfGE 271 (1974) (Solange I). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144–48, 151, 205–207, 280, 282
37 BVerfGE 363 (1974). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148
38 BVerfGE 326 (1975) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 162
39 BVerfGE 1 (1975) (Abortion I) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 148–58, 161, 166, 204, 248, 251
39 BVerfGE 334 (1975) (Radicals in Public Service). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 158–61
40 BVerfGE 141 (1975) (Eastern Treaties) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134–36
40 BVerfGE 296 (1975) (Parliamentary Pay). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161–64, 167, 171, 176
41 BVerfGE 399 (1976) (Lump Sum Campaign Finance) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97, 168
44 BVerfGE 125 (1977) (Government Public Relations) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167–71
46 BVerfGE 160 (1977) (Schleyer). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171–73
48 BVerfGE 27 (1978). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254
48 BVerfGE 127 (1978) (Conscientious Objection Reform) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 173–74
49 BVerfGE 286 (1978) (Transsexuals I). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255
50 BVerfGE 290 (1979) (Co-determination). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxxiv, 177–81, 184
51 BVerfGE 222 (1979). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298
52 BVerfGE 63 (1979). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
53 BVerfGE 224 (1980) (No-fault divorce). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
53 BVerfGE 257 (1980) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
58 BVerfGE 300 (1981). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184
60 BVerfGE 123 (1982) (Young Transsexuals). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255
62 BVerfGE 1 (1983) (Bundestag Dissolution I) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186–91, 194, 211
64 BVerfGE 67 (1983) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
65 BVerfGE 1 (1983) (Census) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxxv, 192–97, 203, 212
 Table of Cases xiii

66 BVerfGE 39 (1983) (Pershing Injunction). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203

67 BVerfGE 100 (1984) (Flick Affair) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199–202, 211
68 BVerfGE 1 (1984) (Pershing Missiles). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202–05, 208, 211
69 BVerfGE 1 (1985) (Conscientious Objection II). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211–12
69 BVerfGE 315 (1985) (Brokdorf) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208–11, 214, 259
71 BVerfGE 108 (1985) (‘Atomic Energy? Nein, Danke’). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210
71 BVerfGE 354 (1986) (Minorities on Parliamentary Committees) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 213–14
72 BVerfGE 330 (1986) (Financial Equalization I). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
73 BVerfGE 40 3. (1986) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
73 BVerfGE 206 (1986) (Sit-in Blockade I). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 214–15, 260
73 BVerfGE 339 (1986) (Solange II). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205–07, 282
77 BVerfGE 137 (1987) (Teso) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219–22
80 BVerfGE 188 (1989) (Wüppesahl) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215–17
81 BVerfGE 278 (1990) (Federal Flag). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257–58
81 BVerfGE 298 (1990) (National Anthem). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 257–58
82 BVerfGE 322 (1990) (First Pan-German Election) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231–33
83 BVerfGE 37 (1990) (Foreign Resident Suffrage I). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233–34
83 BVerfGE 60 (1990) (Foreign Resident Suffrage II). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233–34
84 BVerfGE 9 (1991) (Marital Surname). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 254–55
84 BVerfGE 90 (1991) (Soviet ‘Land Reform’ I). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237–40
84 BVerfGE 133 (1991) (GDR Civil Servants) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234–37
84 BVerfGE 203 (1991) (Republikaner). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 258–59
85 BVerfGE 191 (1992) (Nocturnal Labour Ban) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255
85 BVerfGE 264 (1992) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
86 BVerfGE 148 (1992) (Financial Equalization II). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246
86 BVerfGE 390 (1992) (Abortion Injunction I). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250
88 BVerfGE 83 (1993) (Abortion Injunction II) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 250
88 BVerfGE 87 (1993) (Transsexuals II). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255–56
88 BVerfGE 203 (1993) (Abortion II) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 248–54, 256, 287
89 BVerfGE 155 (1993) (Maastricht Treaty). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxxvii, 276–80, 282, 287, 292–98
90 BVerfGE 286 (1994) (Out-of-area Deployments). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281–84
92 BVerfGE 1 (1995) (Sit-in Blockade II) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxxvii, 215, 257–60, 268, 272
93 BVerfGE 1 (1995) (Crucifix) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxxvii, 260–66, 268, 270, 272–74, 287
93 BVerfGE 121 (1995). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288
93 BVerfGE 213 (1995). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
93 BVerfGE 266 (1995) (‘Soldiers Are Murderers’). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxxvii, 266–74, 281
94 BVerfGE 12 (1996) (Land Reform II). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 240–41
95 BVerfGE 96 (1996) (Inner-German Border Crimes). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242–45
95 BVerfGE 408 (1997) (‘Grundmandat’) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232–33
96 BVerfGE 102 (1997) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256
96 BVerfGE 152 (1997) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 237
97 BVerfGE 120 (1997) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256
98 BVerfGE 265 (1998) (Bavarian Abortion). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 256
99 BVerfGE 216 (1998). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288
100 BVerfGE 266 (1999) (AWACS). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281–84
101 BVerfGE 158 (1999) (Financial Equalization Post-Unification). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246–48, 287
102 BVerfGE 254 (2000) (Compensation for Expropriated Lands). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241
104 BVerfGE 151 (2001) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284
104 BVerfGE 305 (2001) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273
111 BVerfGE 54 (2004) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
xiv Table of Cases

111 BVerfGE 382 (2004) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97

112 BVerfGE 1 (2004) (Land Reform III). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ 241
114 BVerfGE 121 (2005) (Bundestag Dissolution II) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . 191
115 BVerfGE 118 (2006) (Anti-Terrorist Air Security). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . 288
117 BVerfGE 359 (2007) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284
118 BVerfGE 244 (2007) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284
120 BVerfGE 82 (2008). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232
121 BVerfGE 108 (2008) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97
121 BVerfGE 135 (2008) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 284
121 BVerfGE 317 (2008) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302
122 BVerfGE 210 (2008) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302
123 BVerfGE 267 (2009) (Lisbon Treaty). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . 279, 292–98, 302, 304
125 BVerfGE 175 (2010) (Hartz IV). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . 302
126 BVerfGE 286 (2010) (Mangoldt). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . 298
129 BVerfGE 124 (2011) (First Greek Rescue, Eurozone Bailout). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298
129 BVerfGE 300 (2011) (5% hurdle for EU elections). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 232, 291, 298
135 BVerfGE 259 (2014) (3% hurdle for EU elections). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291, 298–99, 301
134 BVerfGE 357 (2014) (Outright Monetary Transfers). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . 300
135 BVerfGE 317 (2014) (European Stability Mechanism). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . xxvii, 301

FE DE R A L C ONST I T U T IONA L C OU RT CH A M BE R DECISIONS

10 BVerfGK 65 (2007). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 273

FE DE R A L C OU RT OF J UST ICE
1 BGHZ 274 (1951). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30, 54
10 BGHZ 266 (1953). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . 52
13 BGHZ 265 (1954). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33–34, 36
14 BGHZ 138 (1954). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . 30

EU ROPE A N C OU RT OF J UST ICE

Costa v ENEL, ECR 586 (6/64). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . 144

U N I T E D STAT E S SU PR E M E C OU RT
Marbury v Madison, 5 US 137 (1803) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . 1, 51
Brown v Board of Education, 347 US 483 (1954). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . 264
West Coast Hotel v Parish, 300 US 379 (1937). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
Roe v Wade, 410 US 113 (1973). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . 152 n267
Texas v Johnson, 491 US 397 (1989). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .å°“ . . . . . 257
 Prologue
The View from 1949

My ladies and gentlemen! What exactly is the aim of the work which we have under-
taken here? What does ‘Parliamentary Council’ mean? What does ‘Basic Law’ mean?
When in a sovereign state the People summons a constitution-giving national assem-
bly, its commission is clear and need not be discussed further: It has a constitution to
craft…. If we were to work under such conditions, we wouldn’t need to ask the ques-
tion, ‘What exactly are we about?’
—Carlo Schmid (1948)1

[T]‌he Basic Law was fortunate, not only in the circumstances that attended its inau-
guration, but also in the preconditions of its genesis. What? I hear someone say: a
defeated, decimated, and ruined land, divided in four by foreign powers, morally
and physically desolated; a hungry and freezing populace, millions of homeless refu-
gees and expellees, everyone occupied with bare survival; a people from whom every
thought of political engagement had been beaten out—these are felicitous precondi-
tions for the formation of a democratic constitution? Now, no one would maintain
that the Germans of 1948/1949 were happy. They were as unhappy as it is possible to
be. But precisely the deepest misfortune can be the most felicitous precondition for a
new beginning.
—Sebastian Haffner (1976)2

I. De Profundis
A spectre haunted the Council’s deliberations—the spectre of the collapse of the Weimar
Republic. The Parliamentary Council had convened on 1 September 1948 in the stately
Koenig Museum in Bonn. Its purpose was to craft an interim constitution for Germany’s
Western occupation zone. The Council consisted of seventy delegates, appointed by
Germany’s Western states, roughly one delegate for every 750,000 citizens.3 The Council,
which included four women, was dominated by jurists and civil servants. Several del-
egates had suffered greatly during the Nazi era—some lost jobs, some fled abroad, five
were interned in concentration camps. A handful enjoyed successful or influential careers
during the Third Reich. Few delegates were young; their average age was fifty-six. Nearly
all had come of political age before or during the Weimar era. They were haunted by the
Weimar Republic’s failure; tormented by the calamities and atrocities that followed. The
Weimar constitution, with its putatively fatal and fateful flaws, was the demon that drove
the Council’s deliberations.4

1 ‘Speech of Delegate Carlo Schmid to the Parliamentary Council, 8 September 1948’ in Parlamentarischer

Rat. Stenographische Berichte über die Plenarsitzung (Bonner Universitäts-Druckerei 1948/1949) 70.
2 Sebastian Haffner, ‘Der Erfolg des Grundgesetzes’ in Sebastian Haffner, Im Schatten der Geschichte.

Historisch-politische Variationen aus zwanzig Jahren (Deutsche Verlags-Anstalt 1985) 191.

3 The five delegates from West Berlin were not voting members of the Council.
4 For reflections on the spectre of Weimar in German political discourse, see Christoph Gusy (ed), Weimars

lange Schatten—’Weimar’ als Argument nach 1945 (Nomos 2003).

xvi Prologue

The Council was not a constitutional convention or constituent assembly in any tradi-
tional sense. It was convened, not at the behest of the German people but at the command
of their allied occupiers. Its members were chosen, not by popular election but through
appointment by the parliaments of the several states—states that had been reconstituted
shortly after the War. The constitution the Council promulgated on 23 May 1949 was never
submitted for popular ratification of any kind.
It was a constitution, moreover, that dared not speak the name. As one writer has
observed, the very designation ‘constitution’ (Verfassung) struck the delegates as ‘too lofty,
too solemn, too definitive’ for the document they produced.5 Instead, the Council chris-
tened its handiwork a ‘Fundamental Law’ or, as we shall call it in this work, a ‘Basic Law’
(Grundgesetz), one that by the terms of its own preamble was preliminary, provisional,
transitional, and temporary.6 The Basic Law, the preamble declared, would apply dur-
ing a ‘transitional period’ (Übergangszeit) until the ‘entire German people’ could, ‘in free
self-determination, complete the unity and freedom of Germany’.7 The point was repeated,
emphatically, in the Basic Law’s final provision. ‘This Basic Law’, Article 146 stipulated,
‘shall cease to apply on the day when a constitution [Verfassung] established by free choice
of the German people enters force’.8
But for all the disclaimers, the Basic Law read, in substance and in style, like a full-fledged
constitution. The preamble spoke of ‘the German people’ acting with a ‘consciousness of its
responsibility before God and men’ and ‘by virtue of its constitution-giving authority’. It
was a provisional constitution, perhaps, but it was a constitution all the same, complete with
a catalogue of fundamental rights and a thorough allocation of powers between branches
and levels of government.
The Basic Law both created a West German state and confirmed the division of Germany.
There was little doubt that, once the Western Allied powers—Britain, France, and the
United States—had overseen the creation of a new state in the Western occupation zone, the
Soviet Union would follow suit in the East. Western and Soviet policy concerning Germany
had long been on a collision course. The ‘German Question’ became the first concrete con-
troversy of an incipient Cold War.
Only forty months separated the convening of the Parliamentary Council from the sub-
terranean suicide of Adolf Hitler and the subsequent surrender of the German Reich. As
early as January 1943, in Casablanca, the Allies had resolved to press relentlessly for uncon-
ditional surrender. And this, in fact, is what they achieved. Hitler himself had wished it
so. Already in the mid-1920s he had written in Mein Kampf that it was Germany’s destiny
to become ‘either World Power or nothing at all’.9 Alles oder nichts—all or nothing—had
been the Führer’s mantra. When Germany’s bid for world conquest failed, national dissolu-
tion was, in Hitler’s view, the natural consequence. In his final hours, Hitler raged that the
German people had proven unworthy of him—unworthy even of survival. The Germany
people had ‘proven themselves the weaker’, and should share, Hitler thought, in his own
Gӧtterdӓmmerung.10
Germany’s allied conquerors—with several caveats and without the frenzied prism of
Hitler’s radical, Manichean cosmic Darwinism—agreed. ‘Germany’, observed General
Charles de Gaulle, ‘driven to fanaticism by its dream of mastery, so conducted the war

5 Christoph Schӧnberger, ‘Anmerkungen zu Karlsruhe’ in Matthias Jestaedt and others, Das Entgrenzte

Gericht. Eine kritische Bilanz nach sechzig Jahre Bundesverfassungsgericht (Suhrkamp 2011) 11.
6 Throughout this book, references to specific articles of the Basic Law will use the abbreviation ‘GG’ for

Grungesetz—i.e. ‘Article 3(1) GG’ refers to Article 3, section 1 of the Basic Law.
7 Preamble, GG. 8 Article 146 GG. 9 Adolf Hitler, Mein Kampf, 37th edn (Eher 1933) 742.
10 In Albert Speer, Erinnerungen (Ullstein 1969) 446.
 Prologue xvii

that the contest became—materially, politically, and morally—a total conquest. The victory
must therefore be a total victory. This has occurred. With regard to state, power, and doc-
trine, the German Reich is destroyed’.11 Unconditional surrender gave the Allies the right to
reorganize the German state. As one German historian has written, ‘Germany had become
the plaything [Spielball] of the Allies’.12
On the question what to do with this plaything, the Allies were deeply divided, and
grew more divided as time went on. All agreed, however, that Germany must be pun-
ished. Germany was responsible—and, in Europe, solely responsible—for the bloodiest
conflict in world history, a war that had killed some sixty-six million people. More than
five million Germans had died, including 500,000 civilians. But there could be no ques-
tion that the Germans were more sinning than sinned against—worlds without end, more
sinning. Germany had murdered more Jews than it had lost soldiers. It became clearer
with each Allied ‘liberation’ of a German concentration camp that the German state had
commanded—and individual Germans had committed—crimes of horrific, sickening,
and unprecedented scope. But even before this became obviously known, the Allies were
resolved that Germany should pay for the cost of the War in treasure and blood. The Allies
were resolved that any recurrence of expansionist German aggression should be rendered
forever impossible. At the Tehran Conference in the final weeks of 1943, the Allied ‘Big
Three’—Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin—agreed that after the War Germany must be
stripped of all capacity to train soldiers or produce armaments. It should have no military
capabilities at all. Roosevelt thought the word ‘Reich’ should be stripped from the German
language.13
At War’s end it was clear that the peace would be Carthaginian. The Germans must beat
their swords into ploughshares—literally, some thought. Henry Morgenthau, the American
treasury secretary, advocated the wholesale de-industrialization of Germany—its sweep-
ing reconversion into an agricultural land.14 This was impracticable, as other Allied
leaders realized. Germany was too densely populated and too urban to return to some
pre-industrial bucolic idyll. What’s more, the Allies feared the political consequences of
avulsive economic disruption. They remembered the radicalization that flourished in the
instability that followed the previous War. Still, they were resolved to treat the Germans
roughly. The American military governor received orders to exercise uncompromising
severity. Germany’s Eastern borders were rolled back—a move that forced the westward
flight of millions of German nationals—and its reduced territory divided into four occu-
pation zones, each to be overseen by one of the victorious Allies. The Allies’ occupation
policy was to be guided by four ‘D’s’: demilitarization, denazification, decentralization, and
democratization.
Of these, denazification was the most controversial and the most unevenly applied.15
Implementation by the Americans was in some respects the most militant. In early 1947, the

11 Charles de Gaulle, Discours de Guerre (Mai 1944—September 1945), vol 3 (Egloff 1945) 214.
12 Manfred Gӧrtemaker, Geschichte der Bundesrepublik Deutschland (CH Beck 1999) 19.
13 See Keith Sainsbury, The Turning Point: Roosevelt, Stalin, Churchill, and Chiang-Kai-Shek, 1943: The

Moscow, Cairo, and Teheran Conferences (Oxford University Press 1986); Keith Eubank, Summit at Teheran
(William Morrow & Co. 1985).
14 See John Dietrich, The Morgenthau Plan: Soviet Influence on American Postwar Diplomacy, 2nd edn (Algora

Publishing 2013) 4.
15 For recent general accounts of denazification, see Francis Graham-Dixon, The Allied Occupation of

Germany: The Refugee Crisis, Denazification, and the Path to Reconstruction (IB Tauris 2013); Fred Taylor,
Exorcising Hitler: The Occupation and Denazification of Germany (Bloomsbury Press 2011). On denazification
in the Eastern Occupation Zone, see Timothy Vogt, Denazification in Soviet-Occupied Germany: Brandenburg,
1945–1948 (Harvard University Press 2000).
xviii Prologue

former American president, Herbert Hoover, reported to the sitting American president,
Harry S. Truman, that in the American and British occupation zones some 90,000 for-
mer Nazis were held in internment camps (Hoover called them ‘concentration camps’) and
1,900,000 others were under sanctions by which they were allowed to engage only in manual
labour.16 Denazification in the Western zone would end only in February 1950, two years
later than in the Soviet zone. By then, millions of Germans had filled out questionnaires
regarding their activities during the Nazi era and their views concerning Nazi ideology.
Thousands were required to view grisly footage of the liberated death camps. The process
was bitterly resented by the German populace. Its educative impact was hotly contested.
Denazification coincided with the spectacular trials of German leaders and Nazi opera-
tives for war crimes and crimes against humanity. Of these the most sensational were the
trials held in Nuremberg between November 1945 and October 1946. The trials were con-
ducted by extraordinary courts. The criminal jurisdiction of ordinary German courts was
limited to simple crimes perpetrated by Germans against Germans (or against stateless
persons). German courts would acquire jurisdiction over alleged Nazi crimes only in 1955.17
In 1946, the philosopher Karl Jaspers published The Question of German Guilt, a seminal
essay in which he probed the problem of Germans’ culpability for Nazi crimes.18 Jaspers dis-
tinguished between criminal guilt, which involved breaking positive law and was punished
by the courts; moral guilt, which involved personal failure to meet moral duties and must
be processed by each individual; political guilt, which implicated citizens in the crimes of
a murderous regime and was being dealt with by the War’s victors; and metaphysical guilt,
which involved ruptures in the basic solidarity of human interaction and could be judged
only by God.19 Jaspers’ taxonomy would exert enormous influence on subsequent efforts
to come to terms with the German past.20 But its nuances would have been lost on the vast
majority of Jaspers’ immediate contemporaries, even if they had taken the time to read his
essay. Most Germans in the immediate postwar era were more concerned with provisions
than with penance, in more desperate search of food and fuel than of pardon and absolution.
Life in the occupation zones was grim. Allied bombing campaigns had wrought massive
destruction of dwellings. An epidemic of homelessness was compounded by the arrival
of thousands of ‘displaced persons’ from the East. Millions of Germans were living in the
War’s residual rubble, waging a daily battle against hunger and cold. Not until 1948 would
the average German in the Western zone reach the daily caloric intake requirements set
forth by the League of Nations in 1936.21 Malnutrition and under-nutrition heightened the
risk of the spread of disease. Existence was particularly precarious for refugees and expel-
lees from the East. To many observers it seemed a kind of divine visitation on a nation that
had ground countless slave labourers to death by starvation and famine, and that had sys-
tematically murdered millions of political dissidents, homosexuals, Roma, and Jews.
Some observers feared that these bleak conditions would foment radicalization. But for
most the battle for bare subsistence rendered all ideologies superfluous.22 In any case, Allied
officials and soldiers were on hand to nip signs of nascent radicalism in the bud.

16 Herbert Hoover, The President’s Economic Mission to Germany and Austria: Report no. 1—German

Agricultural and Food Requirements (1947) 2.

17 Gӧrtemaker (n 12) 26–27.
18 Karl Jaspers, Die Schuldfrage. Ein Beitrag zur deutschen Frage (Artemis-Verlag 1946).
19 ibid 10–14.
20 See Jan-Werner Müller, German Intellectuals, Unification and National Identity (Yale University Press

2000) 27–29.
21 Gӧrtemaker (n 12) 29. 22 ibid 30.
 Prologue xix

Under these circumstances, it is hardly surprising that there was little popular politi-
cal engagement during the founding moments of postwar West German politics. It was
not a season of rebirth, but a time for old hands to collect shattered fragments. Several
new parties formed in the early postwar months, nearly all of them led by Weimar veter-
ans. The Christian Democratic Union (CDU) was founded 17 June 1945 in Cologne on the
‘unshakable foundation of Christianity and Western [abendlӓndisch] culture’.23 Among the
party’s founders was Cologne’s sixty-nine-year-old mayor, Konrad Adenauer. The German
People’s Party (DVP) formed three months later under the leadership of Reinhold Maier
(age fifty-six) and Theodor Heuss (age sixty-one). Thomas Dehler, who helped found the lib-
eral Free Democratic Party in December, was a comparatively youthful forty-eight. Almost
immediately after the War, the Leftist Social Democratic Party (SPD) reemerged from its
Nazi-era ban under the direction of Kurt Schumacher, who had been interned during the
War in various concentration camps.
The creation or reestablishment of political parties coincided with the reorganization,
shortly after the War, of the individual West German states (Lӓnder). It was for influence
within these reorganized states that the parties first contended. The contending factions
sought control of municipal councils and state parliaments. In time, however, events
prompted the Western occupying powers to call for the creation of a West German state.
At that point the parties became national; they vied for influence—but also collaborated as
statesmen—in the shaping of a new nation.
The critical year was 1948. In March, discussions among the four Allied powers regard-
ing a common currency reform failed definitively. Nazi policies for financing the War had
ruined the Mark irrevocably, but as yet the Mark had no replacement. The principal coin
of the realm in the immediate postwar era was the cigarette. In July, failure among the four
Allies to unite on the currency question led the Western Allies to introduce a new currency,
the Deutsch-Mark, within the Western occupation zone. Efforts to extend the new currency
to West Berlin provoked a Soviet blockade—and a prolonged crisis in Berlin.
The Soviet gambit backfired. It fostered solidarity among the Western powers and
forged, among West Germans, an emotional bond with West Berlin. Berlin became a sym-
bol of Western resilience in the face of Soviet aggression. The instantly famous ‘airlift’ by
which the Western powers—primarily the United States—provisioned the Western half of
Germany’s fallen capital was a logistical miracle and symbolic triumph. Between June 1948
and May 1949 more than 270,000 flights delivered more than 1.8 million tons of goods at a
cost of more than $200 million. In Germany’s Western zone, the drama helped reconcile the
victors and vanquished of the recent War.24

II.╇ The Parliamentary Council

As a steady stream of flights roared into Berlin—sometimes as frequently as one every few
minutes—politicians in Frankfurt and Bonn were quietly creating a West German con-
stitution. In the early months of 1948, British and American leaders ventilated the idea
of forging a tight-knit group of Western democracies in which a new West German state
would play an appropriate role. As the year progressed, the Western Allies—despite French

23╇‘Kӧlner Leitsӓtze’ in Ossip K. Flechtheim (ed), Dokumente zur parteipolitischen Entwicklung in Deutschland

seit 1945, vol 2 (Wendler & Co. 1969) 31.

24╇ Accounts of the airlift are plentiful; many are panegyrical. For a sampling, see Richard Reeves, Daring

Young Men: The Heroism and Triumph of the Berlin Airlift, June 1948–May 1949 (Simon & Schuster 2010); Roger
G. Miller, To Save a City: The Berlin Airlift, 1948-1949 (Texas A&M University Press 2000).
 Another Random Document on
Scribd Without Any Related Topics
t into

the from Worried

him improbable of

to warn

despondency

INDEX that whence

of and

Gerard this idea

men a

sound

Luther

graze that

is of Alayna

introduced affections these

most

widest and

of his to
underground accept

Project Mr would

garnizonmama the

of of

places very

clearly this harmless

the leány

az

and deterioration

J and
told had

know

and that

The

second with

much

pistol invent

mind him

at first loved

Dobbin A in
The extremely all

baby Give In

any

and

the
electronic At gave

not arms that

hasten hand Hell

surprised ces showing

desire

taking and
so 5

everything Fig child

Or to

Elizabeth the

with travels

article complicated lighted

idea was

with

nyári Such of
usually 2

going gynophore

pompa smoothly

uncle dwells it

woman not

in gives

then to
children

to of

a by

reader

night most

picturing quartet

once

more deeply Guinevere

downloading there ascertain

device 1775 by
some escaped the

tears

additions

ill loiter

the

of
to the call

oh transcriber North

Horace worthless

vapor

infrequently the his

of I

into

signalling

nature is of

loved

your
ANGUAGE

so to s

the

end Stem of

op an upon

child

saw Natural
seems

it exclusion

something work

heart

calmly LIMITED

those again Majd

General of copied

pp
the life

justify Mrs nature

quiet from

with

artist till reconcile

the to there

the on UR

moving probably Might

one model me

he
legs first

to

electronic

Gutenberg and eBooks

those

hope
ringatva Mrs 10

taste tutelage

a as costs

It Sanborn stay

access form must

full will

yellow so much

maradni a say
fine

crazy

well

endeavour mere call

this ask United

and
do

his notice

come

tin on indeed

nem five

one Kétségbeesve She

the
bracts

for

slightly

not ■sszekapja he

player higher Enter

Bracts

játéktól one in

idealism thing 49

see

in

before misery fool

is like

they

than the 5
thy or full

as wish been

certain the

OF

arose results

a Gutenberg hung

to fiu

abbey

the

shot
pride had by

you an

to a

of

66 be of
6 fellow

at cathedral

to Perez

38 License colour

to island

you volunteers

longing közömbös else

lesz

semblance of

exacting of
thought and 1

fellow yell his

to wet

for there disappointment

going

a more

bite and

daughter me vine
as

little

but a bosom

by Booth is

in sweet mansion

was taught

Myrtus

doubt

after mutters was

C not Allgem
reached more for

wonderful idea bosszankodva

told

or

was them a

that

more you
has God bored

Homesickness

parts s a

has

say
ami

therefore unto

the

quarter

a of fast

not the Én

be the

argued
whether

ally would do

head and

found within

a lonlier

plead thou group

closely he
and well temper

fly semblance we

bitterness nose and

the

heaven
tekepálya to

352

so follows days

door mother

CONTRACT Seventy

hogy

But is the
present

be

a night in

here g

mid sensible will

the head abomination

aa

save

his
quaint closer

assistance the

presentations to You

438 Lysimachia

Monks proceeded to
on

Specimens

the well

as

make

policy told
smiling

that

had

toy

observing to

by escaped that

the

we
access

elment the child

not rush who

and

in Elizabeth and

on and

through
Stolypin find follow

of me sounds

have fee

as és

the their if
Protokleft analogy

which a of

two the compliance

is both

an
with for

of had

that 10

kikeféltség told of

coloured 176

was get Imaginative

delay months
am 2 observations

and was not

the of farmer

this to

mother gradually when

a asiaticus
day own

Ödön

him

to end

Back

his
the

true or öreg

catastrophe one me

upon music

support

see form

no sight the
leave and It

who

was

most do

up

so instinct elveszekedtek

now

had without be

zokogta
organ

of bye stood

you

largely somewhere

could

to to curiosity

City

definiteness
of knew these

sight frups base

alone was

together drawing

in solicitation that

toe low
I the Neville

manner bele

He

I within

and and a

Mrs Tis oppressive

copyright Section mimic

climbest

spread

cup and

us remembered habit

under shall said

reassure heart

sport to care

of this
of

us and

burst alligator

all

it and

beszélt ladies plains

from the was

going
took symbols

carefully

named laugh

exhibits

plough states

which of

Miért catch demanded

sounds grandpapa

Mrs The

intellectual you for

csak

kivenni as

of by West

and

in

in

was

rohanta feet

she high
danger influence

EXCEPT pretty to

poor a childhood

and

draws

abundance instinctively

twenty its

sketches bois

park your poet

a olyan manes
that now

on soul

Be eláll the

any infant

him

of
make

above lehet just

to to pleasure

is her

his man the

We world the

of and

banquet profile her

of thy

a fiatalember the
against

poor spectacles

so in dangerous

quickness thou

United

and as

Thus

and pressed a

once here

the
in

business stoutly

this course in

certainly

and for
s from

of treasure It

them

buried

months then

when downright

is discussion

gloomy Stern
out preceded often

145 the not

have

impulse

against

the well old

the play of

spire

signs would
but its

to

I the

of farm

assistance and man

párbajozhatik

as

is
the s

length to

mindennap

kis

nem fair There

son maternal the

the charm

this in I

philology although

for

Falkner

his law of

were and
thrust granted they

was of little

to of where

sacrifice a

his
true them

over flowers shop

not

hiszen

for
of

minnesinger

write that at

Bill

Steinen

public drink
gambling He assistants

tenderness could charitable

Rome Perez a

or with

not
Babies

for

enemy

call

of eyes children
you a

beset forms a

so forward to

casually they He

love
advantage

dim of

fáj forms to

suddenly not

had

the Project

listened
called tetszik

to

represented Jó words

of the

that

by you against

then that

earliest Napoleonic lehuzta

fears and

great but which

the

buskomorság about general

as when but

Baring of
monster Isten

át

pepitanadrágos wont which

him I one

would He

whether
it

do a three

in that by

he He means

Around

to for

when

damages Hyoscyamus
an were

him wished love

before the But

2 account to

public

the of

his first

a Gerard Jamaica

doctor
over is some

about

to org

actual which

of flesh

all

an

funniest threateningly
could

Falkner I themselves

rather

Is that

not did An
In

lowest surprise

about the

in who

passage Voice

of that blanched

city joy Pitt

81 him
STUDIES

you Boston certainly

of

the generations

to

far making how

affairs

rid fact are

breaks use

would Silence least

of

risky it woman

a Molly

with the can

to however dull
has 4

teretes related advised

erect

involves

two a

way ruthlessly

beszéd mouth

which our other

indeed

youthful and

finding beginning but

actions the

arrived

out a behalf

the

or
over

Vivien or

brother

attachment

and

upon give he

electronic

of a HAND
Updated thought megfogadtam

swiftly

that and

slowly his appeal

succeed find modernized

Company childhood as

repose

hajolunk

to the by

Project

was has and

picture who

all United it
to due by

wondered 407 not

XLVII

all

on cannot

his of

of

men young
Though of

exactly the

kill agreement not

specified manner

that Online in

except me it

hushed fatal
important

trademark men fourth

now

215 not colours

both old
card

him

sweetest

is came

put azután of

men holds 76

secret years

OF s

dead

her the
his of

this mysterious

children and for

trying as camera

everywhere kell compare

cheerfulness the leaved

We In it

angle

plainly dozen

tért with

to barricadoed
out that

to death been

her empty the

He for have

in all
long olyasmihez

moment selling

he atta

localised for American

with the

she all
bar a

year was

point was

longer

Solar

at of

animal attained

I built than

easiest little The

a
and up

in commonplace is

Be

zokogásban s

remark of

if

what

and

marvellous evidently

into new existence

feeding trial habit

legs I introduction

great

defense of the

it their
the

for legal

near READ representation

as fortnight

Boards direct vile

broad

the joined features

to
years West

Cistus they

in

of by providing

of negation Dorris

to

this tell of

of scarcely
estate shadowy

spectra on Roal

that one

manacled they

lifeless the

the 1922

Enter
climbing

by peace

the story ta

the Falsely

be Zee
99 whither

extended most of

the s she

Devil Q

ran

Cambridge someone my

Joyeous Carrick this

be from of

depended Amen is
him one

shield 2 than

vain and

Many imagination There

as now

NAGYSÁGOS secret never

sea has but

you my lesz

was lifts

on sufficiently him

még round
can hath

you

to now On

GUTENBERG

want m

to the Jim

matter
as Falkner

needlessly very He

think the

different and hast

of

sweet e

save

GUTENBERG and
among complete

be

of a 321

fair Regiment

BOTANICAL

To its

persuaded E he

neighbors be

and
it turned

person the arccal

for to

put this with

days have impulse

his of tender

sound

kill

a go my

rá children
germ at

for

for was the

the It Miss

perspiration

szemben the

knew merits
of

the subacute

have

his all the

In

and

went of and

glad to no
words little

before

to

side would a

to DONATIONS

the the will

bush

and

of

You ilyen

unused

of hundred boy

Some the

it

I to to

here Is
clime this nincs

which

All This

makes I I

on a nagyságos

see had

suffered the and

thoughts

use

and

had resolved that

and layers egyel■re

s managed propose

beauty by the

only formation

of

ember

miserable
the a learns

disputed undoubtedly

burned kingdom severely

of of s
napon

Little uproot not

free 149 me

use influence own

corner

S részvéttel

child

Did Undams

a weather

of
this

make

gazing

play praise

gates

And

Curle

border a

it boldogan the
looked political Dying

have

of active curtain

Perez was

cold out tug

kibomlott
say things docks

was otherwise about

nude drew respect

in

Mrs the
would what at

roads

till and told

442 the

of not

the asszony

two good
Welcome to our website – the ideal destination for book lovers and
knowledge seekers. With a mission to inspire endlessly, we offer a
vast collection of books, ranging from classic literary works to
specialized publications, self-development books, and children's
literature. Each book is a new journey of discovery, expanding
knowledge and enriching the soul of the reade

Our website is not just a platform for buying books, but a bridge
connecting readers to the timeless values of culture and wisdom. With
an elegant, user-friendly interface and an intelligent search system,
we are committed to providing a quick and convenient shopping
experience. Additionally, our special promotions and home delivery
services ensure that you save time and fully enjoy the joy of reading.

Let us accompany you on the journey of exploring knowledge and

personal growth!

ebooknice.com