ABSTRACT
The Eurozone crisis precipitated a shift towards intergovernmental forms of European Union (EU) governance involving executive dominance and a reduced role for the European Parliament, and consequently it spotlighted the EU’s democratic legitimacy. Several recent contributions to the EU democracy literature argue that the intergovernmental shift has reduced possibilities for EU citizens to exercise self-determination, and that the Court of Justice of the European Union is complicit since it is generally an object and agent of EU integration, a tool for establishing an autonomous supranational legal order. The structure of court rulings varies between and within jurisdictions depending on the prevailing conditions under which legal power is and should be determined. Separate opinions demonstrate alternative perspectives, suggesting that the decision is contingent and may be open to revision; it is contestable in the post-decisional sense. Separate opinions indicate meticulousness, that the majority has covered multiple angles and defeated criticisms.
