IMISCOE Research Series Rainer Bauböck Editor Debating European Citizenship IMISCOE Research Series This series is the official book series of IMISCOE, the largest network of excellence on migration and diversity in the world. It comprises publications which present empirical and theoretical research on different aspects of international migration. The authors are all specialists, and the publications a rich source of information for researchers and others involved in international migration studies. The series is published under the editorial supervision of the IMISCOE Editorial Committee which includes leading scholars from all over Europe. The series, which contains more than eighty titles already, is internationally peer reviewed which ensures that the book published in this series continue to present excellent academic standards and scholarly quality. Most of the books are available open access. For information on how to submit a book proposal, please visit: http://www. imiscoe.org/publications/how-to-submit-a-book-proposal. More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/13502 Rainer Bauböck Editor Debating European Citizenship ISSN 2364-4087 ISSN 2364-4095 (electronic) IMISCOE Research Series ISBN 978-3-319-89904-6 ISBN 978-3-319-89905-3 (eBook) https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89905-3 Library of Congress Control Number: 2018953168 © The Editor(s) (if applicable) and The Author(s) 2019. Open Access This book is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this book are included in the book’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the book’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publication does not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevant protective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use. The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in this book are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors or the editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for any errors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations. This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer Nature Switzerland AG The registered company address is: Gewerbestrasse 11, 6330 Cham, Switzerland Editor Rainer Bauböck European University Institute San Domenico di Fiesole, Italy This book is an open access publication. v Acknowledgements This volume brings together three forums originally published online and as Robert Schuman Centre Working Papers and adds to these an original essay by Jo Shaw. Each of the debates was co-edited by myself with the authors of the lead essays introducing them. The forum ‘Should EU Citizens Living in Other Member States Vote There in National Elections?’ was kicked off and co-edited by Philippe Cayla and Catriona Seth, the forum ‘Freedom of Movement Under Attack: Is It Worth Defending as the Core of EU Citizenship?’ by Floris de Witte, and the forum ‘Should EU Citizenship Be Duty-Free?’ by Maurizio Ferrera. I am very grateful to them for agreeing to this book publication as well as to the altogether 41 authors in this book whose contributions have engaged with the controversial questions we asked them to answer in a spirit of a respectful and frank debate. My most profound thanks go to Jelena Dzankic and Oriane Caligaro who were involved in these debates at different times as coordinators of the EUDO Citizenship project, as well as to Anna Kyriazi who has provided extremely competent and reliable assistance in editing this book. Robert Schuman Centre Rainer Bauböck European University Institute Fiesole, Italy vii Preface Are the nationals of EU member states also citizens of the European Union? This is what Art. 20 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union says they are. But what precisely does it mean to be a citizen of a union which some observers still describe as an international organization that just coordinates the interests of its member states across a wider range of poli- cies than most others do? The present volume addresses this question in an unusual way. There is already a large number of excellent books on the topic that collect stand- alone chapters from authors presenting different answers. 1 Readers inter- ested in historical, legal and political science perspectives on EU citizenship should consult these volumes. Yet in such publications, scholars rarely speak and behave as citizens are supposed to do – they present their views without engaging with each other in a dialogue on questions that citizens are con- cerned about. The present book is different; it is a collection of debates, each of which asks a question that is at the core of the present EU citizenship dilemmas. In a political debate, speakers are expected to listen to each other and to address each other. The three debates in this book are the results of online debates that have been actually structured like a conversation. The first con - tribution in each debate is a kick-off that defends a specific answer to the lead question. The subsequent contributions were not all commissioned at the same time but over several months and each author was asked to respond not only to the question and the kick-off text, but to take into account or criticise also the views of the previous responses without repeating points already made by others. Contributions are short, written in a non-technical 1 See e.g. Bellamy, R. and Warleigh, A. (eds.) (2001), Citizenship and gover- nance in the European Union . London, New York: Continuum; Bellamy, R., Castiglione, D. and Santoro, E. (eds.) (2004), Lineages of European Citizenship: Rights, Belonging and Participation in Eleven Nation-States New York: Palgrave Macmillan; Isin, E. F. and Saward, M. (eds.) (2013), Enacting European Citizenship . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Kochenov, D. (ed.) (2017), EU Citizenship and Federalism: The Role of Rights . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Thym, D. (ed.) (2017), Questioning EU citizenship: judges and the limits of free movement and solidarity in the EU . Oxford; Portland, Oregon: Hart Publishing. viii language and addressed to a broader audience than the respective discipline of the author. We have also deliberately invited non-academic authors whose practical knowledge or civic engagement provides important insights. This format should be very useful for teaching purposes at undergraduate as well as graduate level. I sincerely hope that the book will also be read by practi- tioners and those often insultingly called ‘ordinary citizens’ who are inter- ested in the future of Europe. In the past, organising such a conversation across a wide range of coun- tries and academic disciplines would have been extraordinarily difficult. Today, this can be done on the Internet. All three debates in this book have been originally published online in the Forum section of the EUDO CITIZENSHIP observatory, which has recently expanded into GLOBALCIT, the Global Citizenship Observatory. The book also meets another important requirement for debates among citizens: they must be public and freely accessible to all. This was of course true for the original online publication of the three debates. Yet it is still exceptional for academic books to be freely accessible under a ‘golden open access’ licence. I am therefore very grateful to the IMISCOE editorial committee and to Springer for accepting to pub- lish the book in their open access series. There is one way in which the debates in this book differ from the ideal of political deliberation among citizens in the public sphere. These debates do not aim to reach conclusions in the sense of a political decision taken by majority vote or a consensus achieved through the force of the better argu- ment. They leave the initial question open. One reason is that it is really hard to make academic scholars change their views. The other and more impor- tant reason is that it is not for them to decide these questions. The aim of these debates is thus to inform readers about a wide range of views pre- sented by authors who respectfully disagree with each other even after hav- ing made strong efforts to engage with each other. What the reader gets from this is, hopefully, different and also less time consuming than what she can learn from ploughing through thick academic volumes. The three debates collected in this volume concern all three dimensions of citizenship that T. H. Marshall identified in his seminal essay of 1949: the civil, political and social aspects of EU citizenship. The first debate was held in 2012, before the 2014 European Parliament elections and should be picked up again before the forthcoming ones in May 2019. It raises the ques - tion of why mobile EU citizens can vote in local and EP elections in their host EU member state, but not in national elections. For some authors this is a serious democratic deficit, for others it illustrates that the EU is not a fed - eration but a union of states. Preface ix The second debate addresses the civil right of free movement, which is at the core of EU citizenship. The context for this debate was the Brexit referendum, in which EU free movement became the most controversial policy issue and before which the UK government had negotiated conces- sions that included new powers to restrict temporarily access of EU citizens to certain welfare benefits. The question posed to the authors is whether free movement should still be defended and expanded because it enhances free- dom from state interference, or whether this dimension has been over- stretched through decisions by the Court of Justice of the European Union at the expense of the political will of majorities in the member states and of national welfare regimes. The third and most recent debate continues in many ways the second one. It starts from the question of why EU citizenship does not include any citizen duties, although the Treaties speak in a general way about the rights and duties of the citizens of the Union. This puzzle leads very quickly to a general controversy about the ‘weight’ of EU citizenship and its main ben- eficiaries. Several authors regard EU citizenship as a progressive force pre - cisely because it protects individual liberties beyond the nation-state without imposing legal duties or thicker identities on them, while others advocate a stronger social component that would also address cleavages resulting from rising social inequality and the populist backlash among the less mobile Europeans. This debate in particular discusses also practical policy propos- als for EU duties and social rights. Although the debates were held at different periods over the last six years, none of them has become irrelevant or outdated. There are, however, important aspects of EU citizenship that are not covered in them. These concern in particular the impact of EU citizenship on the citizenship of member states from which it is derived and the – as yet unknown – solutions to the loss of EU citizenship rights enjoyed by UK citizens in Europe and of EU citizen rights in the UK after Brexit. The three debates are therefore complemented by an introductory essay on these topics specifically written for this volume by Jo Shaw, a prominent EU lawyer and co-director of the GLOBALCIT observatory. This book has a companion volume on the ‘Transformations of National Citizenship’ that will be published in the same series later this year and that collects four more GLOBALCIT forum debates on current challenges for citizenship in democratic states. Florence Rainer Bauböck February 2018 Preface xi Contents EU citizenship: Still a Fundamental Status? ......................................... 1 Jo Shaw Part I: Should EU Citizens Living in Other Member States Vote There in National Elections? EU-Citizens Should Have the Right to Vote in National Elections ........ 21 Philippe Cayla and Catriona Seth EU Citizens Should Have Voting Rights in National Elections, But in Which Country? ........................................................................... 23 Rainer Bauböck A European or a National Solution to the Democratic Deficit? ............ 27 Alain Brun EU Accession to the ECHR Requires Ensuring the Franchise for EU Citizens in National Elections .................................................... 31 Andrew Duff How to Enfranchise Second Country Nationals? Test the Options for Best Fit, Easiest Adoption and Lowest Costs.................................... 33 David Owen What’s in a People? Social Facts, Individual Choice, and the European Union ........................................................................ 37 Dimitry Kochenov Testing the Bonds of Solidarity in Europe’s Common Citizenship Area ..................................................................................... 43 Jo Shaw ‘An Ever Closer Union Among the Peoples of Europe’: Union Citizenship, Democracy, Rights and the Enfranchisement of Second Country Nationals ................................................................. 47 Richard Bellamy Five Pragmatic Reasons for a Dialogue with and Between Member States on Free Movement and Voting Rights ............................ 51 Kees Groenendijk xii Don’t Start with Europeans First. An Initiative for Extending Voting Rights Should also Promote Access to Citizenship for Third Country Nationals ................................................................... 55 Hannes Swoboda Voting Rights and Beyond... ................................................................... 57 Martin Wilhelm One Cannot Promote Free Movement of EU Citizens and Restrict Their Political Participation .............................................. 61 Dora Kostakopoulou Second Country EU Citizens Voting in National Elections Is an Important Step, but Other Steps Should Be Taken First ................ 69 Ángel Rodríguez A More Comprehensive Reform Is Needed to Ensure That Mobile Citizens Can Vote ....................................................................... 73 Sue Collard Incremental Changes Are not Enough – Voting Rights Are a Matter of Democratic Principle ................................................... 77 Tony Venables Mobile Union Citizens Should Have Portable Voting Rights Within the EU ......................................................................................... 81 Roxana Barbulescu Concluding Remarks: Righting Democratic Wrongs ............................. 85 Philippe Cayla and Catriona Seth Part II: Freedom of Movement Under Attack: Is it Worth Defending as the Core of EU Citizenship? Freedom of Movement Needs to Be Defended as the Core of EU Citizenship ................................................................................... 93 Floris De Witte The Failure of Union Citizenship Beyond the Single Market................. 101 Daniel Thym State Citizenship, EU Citizenship and Freedom of Movement .............. 107 Richard Bellamy Free Movement as a Means of Subject-Formation: Defending a More Relational Approach to EU Citizenship ................... 113 Päivi Johanna Neuvonen Free Movement Emancipates, but What Freedom Is This? .................... 117 Vesco Paskalev Contents xiii Free Movement and EU Citizenship from the Perspective of Intra-European Mobility .................................................................... 121 Saara Koikkalainen The New Cleavage Between Mobile and Immobile Europeans ............. 125 Rainer Bauböck Whose Freedom of Movement Is Worth Defending? .............................. 129 Sarah Fine The Court and the Legislators: Who Should Define the Scope of Free Movement in the EU? ................................................................ 133 Martijn van den Brink Reading Too Much and Too Little into the Matter? Latent Limits and Potentials of EU Freedom of Movement .............................. 139 Julija Sardelić What to Say to Those Who Stay? Free Movement is a Human Right of Universal Value ......................................................................... 145 Kieran Oberman Union Citizenship for UK Citizens ........................................................ 149 Glyn Morgan UK Citizens as Former EU Citizens: Predicament and Remedies......... 153 Reuven (Ruvi) Ziegler ‘Migrants’, ‘Mobile Citizens’ and the Borders of Exclusion in the European Union ........................................................................... 163 Martin Ruhs EU Citizenship, Free Movement and Emancipation: A Rejoinder ......... 169 Floris De Witte Part III: Should EU Citizenship Be Duty-Free? EU Citizenship Needs a Stronger Social Dimension and Soft Duties ....................................................................................... 181 Maurizio Ferrera Liberal Citizenship Is Duty-Free ............................................................ 199 Christian Joppke Building Social Europe Requires Challenging the Judicialisation of Citizenship ......................................................................................... 205 Susanne K. Schmidt EU Citizenship Should Speak Both to the Mobile and the Non-Mobile European ............................................................... 211 Frank Vandenbroucke Contents xiv The Impact and Political Accountability of EU Citizenship................... 219 Dorte Sindbjerg Martinsen ‘Feed them First, Then Ask Virtue of Them’: Broadening and Deepening Freedom of Movement .................................................. 223 Andrea Sangiovanni EU Citizenship, Duties and Social Rights.............................................. 231 Martin Seeleib-Kaiser Why Compensating the ‘Stayers’ for the Costs of Mobility Is the Wrong Way to Go .......................................................................... 235 Julia Hermann Balancing the Rights of European Citizenship with Duties Towards National Citizens: An Inter-National Perspective ................... 239 Richard Bellamy Grab the Horns of the Dilemma and Ride the Bull ................................ 245 Rainer Bauböck Why Adding Duties to European Citizenship Is Likely to Increase the Gap Between Europhiles and Eurosceptics ................... 257 Theresa Kuhn Enhancing the Visibility of Social Europe: A Practical Agenda for ‘The Last Mile’..................................................................... 261 Ilaria Madama Towards a ‘Holding Environment’ for Europe’s (Diverse) Social Citizenship Regimes .................................................................... 267 Anton Hemerijck Imagine: European Union Social Citizenship and Post-Marshallian Rights and Duties ...................................................... 279 Dora Kostakopoulou Why the Crisis of European Citizenship is a Crisis of European Democracy......................................................................... 287 Sandra Seubert Regaining the Trust of the Stay-at-Homes: Three Strategies.................. 293 Philippe Van Parijs Social Citizenship, Democratic Values and European Integration: A Rejoinder ............................................................................................ 299 Maurizio Ferrera Contents xv About the editor Rainer Bauböck is currently a part time professor at the Robert Schuman Centre of the European University Institute. He held the chair in social and political theory at the Department of Political and Social Sciences of the EUI from 2007 to 2018 and was Dean of Graduate Studies from 2012 to 2016. Rainer Bauböck is also a corresponding member of the Austrian Academy of Sciences and chair of its Commission on Migration and Integration Research. His research interests are in normative political theory and comparative research on democratic citizenship, migration, European integration, nation- alism and minority rights. Together with Jo Shaw (University of Edinburgh) and Maarten Vink (University of Maastricht), he coordinates GLOBALCIT, an online observatory on citizenship and voting rights. His most recent book publications are: Democratic Inclusion. Rainer Bauböck in Dialogue, Manchester University Press: Manchester, 2017; The Oxford Handbook of Citizenship (Ayelet Shachar, Rainer Bauböck, Irene Bloemraad, Maarten Vink, eds.). Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2017; Transnational Citizenship and Migration (Rainer Bauböck, ed., London: Routledge, 2017). xvii Contributors Roxana Barbulescu University Academic Fellow in New Migrations in UK and Europe, School of Sociology and Social Policy, University of Leeds Richard Bellamy Professor of Political Science and Director of the Max Weber Programme, European University Institute Alain Brun Former officer of the European Commission Philippe Cayla Européens sans frontières, Paris, France Sue Collard Senior Lecturer in French Politics and Contemporary European Studies, University of Sussex Department of Politics, Sussex European Institute, Sussex Centre for Migration Research Floris de Witte Associate Professor, Department of Law, London School of Economics and Political Science Andrew Duff President of the Spinelli Group and Visiting Fellow at the European Policy Centre Maurizio Ferrera Professor of Political Science, Department of Social and Political Sciences, University of Milan Sarah Fine Senior Lecturer in Philosophy, Department of Philosophy, King’s College London Kees Groenendijk Emeritus Professor of Sociology of Law, founder and Research Fellow of the Centre for Migration Law, Radboud University Anton Hemerijck Professor of Political Science and Sociology, Director of Graduate Studies, Department of Political and Social Sciences, European University Institute Julia Hermann Post-doctoral research fellow, Department of Philosophy and Religious Studies, Utrecht University Christian Joppke Professor of General Sociology, Institute of Sociology, University of Bern Dimitry Kochenov Chair in EU Constitutional Law, Faculty of Law, University of Groningen Saara Koikkalainen University researcher, University of Lapland Dora Kostakopoulou Professor of European Union Law, European Integration and Public Policy, School of Law, University of Warwick Theresa Kuhn Associate Professor of Political Science, Department of Political Science, University of Amsterdam Ilaria Madama Associate Professor of Political Science, Department of Social and Political Sciences, University of Milan Glyn Morgan Associate Professor of Political Science, Maxwell School, Syracuse University and Collegio Alberto xviii Päivi Johanna Neuvonen Academy of Finland Postdoctoral Researcher, Faculty of Law, University of Helsinki Kieran Oberman Lecturer in Politics, School of Social and Political Science, Edinburgh University David Owen Professor of Social and Political Philosophy, Division of Politics and International Relations, University of Southampton Vesco Paskalev Lecturer, School of Law and Politics, University of Hull Ángel Rodríguez Full Professor of Constitutional Law, Facultad de Derecho, University of Málaga Martin Ruhs Chair in Migration Studies and Deputy Director of the Migration Policy Centre, European University Institute Andrea Sangiovanni Professor of Philosophy, Department of Philosophy, King’s College London Julija Sardelić Marie Skłodowska Curie Postdoctoral Fellow, Leuven International and European Studies, University of Leuven Susanne K. Schmidt Professor of Political Science, Bremen International Graduate School of Social Sciences, University of Bremen Martin Seeleib-Kaiser Professor of Comparative Public Policy, Institute of Political Science, Eberhard Karls Universität Tübingen Catriona Seth Marshal Foch Professor of French Literature, All Souls College, University of Oxford Sandra Seubert Professor of Political Theory, Department of Political Science, Goethe University Frankfurt Jo Shaw Salvesen Chair of European Institutions, School of Law, University of Edinburgh Dorte Sindbjerg Martinsen Professor of Political Science, Department of Political Science, University of Copenhagen Hannes Swoboda Former member of the European Parliament (Austria) and President of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats in the European Parliament Daniel Thym Jean-Monnet-Chair of European, International and Public Law and managing Director of the Research Centre Immigration and Asylum Law, University of Konstanz Martijn van den Brink Postdoctoral researcher, Max Planck Institute for the Study of Religious and Ethnic Diversity Philippe Van Parijs Hoover Chair of Economic and Social Ethics, Centre for Ethics, Social and Political Philosophy, University of Louvain Frank Vandenbroucke University Professor, University of Amsterdam Tony Venables Founder of the European Citizen Action Service Martin Wilhelm Director of Citizens For Europe Reuven (Ruvi) Ziegler Associate Professor in International Refugee Law, School of Law, University of Reading Contributors 1 © The Author(s) 2019 R. Bauböck (ed.), Debating European Citizenship , IMISCOE Research Series, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89905-3_1 EU citizenship: Still a Fundamental Status? Jo Shaw Introduction Modern history is littered with the corpses of failed federations and busted unions. These processes of breakup have had significant and often damaging citizenship consequences on many occasions and in many places. Examples can be found in the dissolution of Yugoslavia and of the Soviet Union, as well as in the dismantling of the various European empires and the creation of numerous new (and generally arbitrarily defined) states, often as part of the decolonisation process. 1 Breakup may, of course, eventually be the fate of the European Union. Or it may be the opposite – the transmutation of the EU into something more like a federal state, through an intensified constitu - tionalisation process. This essay explores some of the pressures that are being placed on the concept of citizenship of the Union at the present time, highlighting how these stem both from exogenous pressures (assuming Brexit can be thought to be such) and endogenous forces such as Eurosceptic voting publics and a resistance to showing solidarity across the member states in an era of austerity. EU citizenship is paradoxical in nature: formally constitutionalised in the Union’s treaty framework, yet dependent upon national citizenship to provide the gateway to membership. Its fate remains intimately tied to the broader question of the trajectory of European integration, as well as to changing perspectives about the character of citizenship as a membership status. To highlight that paradoxical character, I offer below some brief reflections on the autonomy of national citizenship laws, on the consequences of Brexit, and on how choices and actions by individuals and groups may 1 For an overview of different ‘imperial’ repertoires see Gammerl, B. (2017), Subject, citizens, and others: Administering Ethnic Heterogeneity in the British and Habsburg Empires, 1867–1918. New York/Oxford: Berghahn Books. This essay was written whilst I was holding a EURIAS Fellowship at the Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies, and the financial support of the EURIAS Programme and HCAS is acknowledged with thanks. I am very grateful to Rainer Bauböck for comments on a draft. 2 impact upon the future of EU citizenship. This discussion is prefaced by an initial exploration of the challenges and complexities of EU citizenship and of the relationship between citizenship and concepts of integration and Europeanisation. Challenges and complexities of EU citizenship The current difficulties faced by the European Union are many and varied. They include the pressures caused by the UK’s Brexit vote, the effects of increasingly illiberal, populist and anti-constitutionalist regimes in Hungary and Poland, the lingering impacts of the financial crisis, among them auster - ity and challenges to the health of the Eurozone, and the continued aftermath of the migration/refugee crisis. These all raise questions about the vitality of citizenship of the European Union as a political, socio-economic and consti - tutional construct of a supranational kind, and many of them are debated in different ways by the various multi-author ‘forums’ presented in this book. Whether these difficulties do or do not pose an existential threat to the EU and thus to EU citizenship lies beyond the scope of this essay. Even so, con- templating the possibility of disintegration and/or de-Europeanisation is central to the task of reinterpreting EU citizenship, 25 years after it formally entered into force through the Treaty of Maastricht in 1993. This is because of the centrality and overwhelming importance of the Brexit challenge (both for the individuals directly affected and also for the historical trajectory of the European Union), to which we will return later in this short reflection on some of the ‘constitutional’ characteristics of EU citizenship. It is important to remark, however, that at the current stage of the European integration, no person deprived of their EU citizenship through dissolution of the Union or departure of a member state would normally be at risk of losing their national citizenship and their anchor within the system of states, their ‘right to have rights’. 2 Although the functions and forms of citizenship are dispersed across the multi-level structure of the EU polity and EU citizenship is established constitutionally in Article 9 TEU and Articles 20 and 21 TFEU, at the present time states retain a monopoly over determining who their citizens are, and would continue to do so were the EU to dissolve in the future. At whatever point we choose to ‘stop time’ and write a historical reinter - pretation of the EU’s experiment with a form of supranational citizenship, it will always be a complex and contested story. It is important to resist the 2 Arendt, H. (1967), The Origins of Totalitarianism . London: George Allen & Unwin, 296. J. Shaw 3 temptation to take a ‘frozen in time’ approach to explicating this story. On the contrary, we should remind ourselves, by reference to classic texts such as that of TH Marshall, 3 that the location of citizenship forms and functions has always been a mobile process, morphing at different points in history between the local (e.g. the city), the regional, the national and the suprana- tional. In fact, we can use the concept of citizenship across all of these lev- els, wherever there are institutions of political authority. The idea of the link between a community of citizens and a political authority was not really the starting point for EU citizenship. The European Union began its journey towards recognising a uniform legal status for indi - viduals at the supranational level not by acknowledging and supporting the political agency of individuals as citizens, but by giving them rights and freedoms. Specifically, it was through the civil and socio-economic rights and freedoms that are inherent in the idea of a single market that a notion of the individual having a stake in the integration project originally emerged. Much of the power of these rights and freedoms to effect a transformation of individual rights lay in the recognition of individuals as autonomous legal actors within the European legal order by the European Court of Justice (CJEU). This was an important conclusion, which the Court derived from a purposive reading of the founding treaties. In addition, some further contri - butions towards the development of the rights of EU market actors were also made by the EU legislature, especially when it came to giving effect to the principles of non-discrimination on grounds of nationality and mutual rec - ognition. Most of this work predated the formal establishment of the legal concept of the Union citizen. Only later was a modest edifice of political rights constructed (once the Treaty of Maastricht had entered into force and the constitutional provisions we recognise today had been introduced) and it was even later still that we have come to see a closer legal and constitutional intertwining of the legal statuses of EU citizenship and national citizenship, again largely as a result of the interventions of the CJEU. We will come back to this dimension of EU citizenship shortly. What has been most noticeable about this process has been that the idea of the ‘civil’ (a ‘Europe of law’) has underpinned and accompanied every stage of the putative building of supranational citizenship. This looks, at first blush, like a wholly top-down construction of 3 Marshall, T.H. (1950), Citizenship and Social Class . Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. EU citizenship: Still a Fundamental Status? 4 citizenship that does little to illuminate the broader political quest to identify ‘who are the Europeans?’. 4 Another way of highlighting the idiosyncracies of EU citizenship involves looking at the classic elements commonly associated with modelling citizen - ship as a form of full membership (e.g. status, rights, identity, duties). It is only in the sphere of rights that EU citizenship seems well developed. As to the issue of identity, the sense of ‘Europeanness’ that exists across the col - lectivity of citizens is relatively thin in nature, again focused on rights, and it is hardly comparable with the form of societal glue that gives community cohesion to the national (and subnational) polities on which the EU is built. 5 Moreover, the status itself remains derivative from national citizenship – only citizens of the member states are citizens of the Union. And yet despite all of this negativity, there is also a more optimistic read - ing that suggests that EU citizenship could be evolving into a different sort of concept than was perhaps anticipated when the member states originally set up the legal framework, mainly as an additional bonus for market partici - pants. Scholars laud EU citizenship as an emerging postnational concept that escapes ‘narrow’ nationalist constraints of state-based citizenship regimes. 6 The comparison with other forms of supranational citizenship, such as Commonwealth citizenship, makes EU citizenship look like a relative suc - cess story. Commonwealth citizenship largely withered on the vine because of the evisceration of most of the rights attached to it (e.g. right of abode in the UK), or the non-adoption of the concept by Commonwealth countries. By contrast, we have a rich, if sometimes contradictory, case law of the Court of Justice on the status of EU citizens resident in other member states that ensures that in many spheres of life EU citizens have to be recognised as holding rights under the precise same conditions as nationals of the host state. Furthermore, there is now a discussion, as evidenced by section 3 of this book on citizenship duties and social solidarity, as to whether this dimension of EU citizenship should be filled out in due course, in ways that would make EU citizenship relevant not only to mobile citizens, but also to those 4 See generally Shaw, J. (2011), ‘Citizenship: contrasting dynamics at the interface of integration and constitutionalism’, in P. Craig & G. de Búrca (eds,), The Evolution of EU Law , 2nd Edition, 575–609. Oxford: OUP. 5 Bellamy, R. (2008), ‘Evaluating Union citizenship: belonging, rights and participation within the EU’, Citizenship Studies 12 (6): 597–611. 6 Kostakopoulou, D. (2018), ‘ Scala Civium : Citizenship Templates Post-Brexit and the European Union’s Duty to Protect EU Citizens’, JCMS: Journal of Common Market Studies , doi: https://doi.org/10.1111/jcms.12683 J. Shaw