Abstract
Chapter 8 unpacks how the absence of Euro-lawyering and mediatory public advocacy can embolden on-the-ground backlash to European Union (EU) laws and European Court of Justice (ECJ) decisions. The chapter contrasts Chapter 7's analysis of the Port of Genoa case with a similarly explosive controversy yielding a far more regressive outcome: The 2015 Xylella case. As a plant pathogen described as "the coronavirus of olive trees" began devastating olive groves in southern Italy, the European Commission and the ECJ intervened by mandating the eradication of thousands of diseased trees. Farmers revolted against these decisions and called for disobedience, yet a legacy of noncompliance was hardly inevitable. Contentious resistance proliferated because it unfolded in a context devoid of Euro-lawyers ready to proactively advocate for compliance in a way that resonated with local stakeholders, judges, and journalists. In fact, some local lawyers and judges even joined resistance efforts and began trafficking in conspiracy. The chapter speaks to readers interested in how contentious politics can produce a defiant legal consciousness, how this consciousness can diffuse from the streets to the bar and bench, and how it threatens to corrode the judicial construction of Europe.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
