Eliminar las referencias ocultas a la esclavitud

[Mauro Casarotto]

You are right.

[Lars Næsbye Christensen]

La caja de herramientas constitucional no hace referencia a la esclavitud, sino que explica que esto sirve para dar a los estados algún tiempo con su configuración actual antes de que se haga una política común de inmigración (p. 210). Podría ser de 3 ó 5 años, por ejemplo.

Así que no creo que sea problemático por esa razón específica, pero probablemente no sea necesario en ningún caso.

[Jakub Jermar]

Well neither does the US constitution, but the reason this strikingly similar formulation is there is to keep the slave trade going for some time.

See:
https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed42.asp

My argument is: since we don’t have slave trade in Europe, we don’t need this paragraph. Or at least don’t make it look like it is the redressed US one (which for sure is about slave trade).

[Lars Næsbye Christensen]

Yes, lets remove it.

[Herbert Tombeur]

Yes, I join you both. Let us delete Aricle III, Section 3, par. 1, about immigration. I add this argument to yours: entry, stay and residence of non-nationals on the State territory may likely stay a Member State competence. Why? I observe that there is a very narrow common ground for any EF concerning immigration from outside the Federation, as European countries are very different in territorial size, population density, social system and economic strength. If any constitutional stipulation about migration would be maintained, it could concern only the/some internal migration policy between the Member States of the Federation.

[Autor]

Entradas