Has EU undermined sovereignty of member states?

Structure of essay?

• P1 - Influence of EU on national policy making

• P2 - EU’s commitment to an ever closer union

• P3 - Influence of EU’s core institutions on sovereignty

P1 - Influence on EU national policy making - EU overrides national law

• Central argument that the EU undermines sovereignty is that it has removed the ability of their parliaments to legislate on key policy areas as EU law is supreme to domestic law.

  • This principle of EU law supremacy means that, in cases of conflict, EU law taks precedence over national legislation, which limits their ability to control policy areas.

    • This principle was firmly established in the Costa v ENEL (1964) ruling by the ECJ, which declared that EU law is binding on all member states.

• This supremacy affects various policy areas, including competition laws, trade, environmental standards, and consumer protection, where EU regulations must be adopted even if they contradict national preferences.

  • For example, member states cannot introduce laws to aid important sectors of their economy through tariffs, subsidies, or other rules as this discriminates against other countries industries.

  • In 2019, France introduced a law to limit pesticide use specifically to protect the wine industry, but in 2021, the ECJ ruled it as non-compliant with its agricultural standards.

  • France was subsequently forced to withdraw the law, demonstrating how EU law can override country-specific initiatives.

• This has also meant that counties with struggling sectors can be harmed.

  • For example, Italy has a struggling automotive and steel industries and may have wished to support them in the context of global competition to aid their competitiveness and prevent losses.

P1 - Influence on EU national policy making - Member states retain control over key areas

• On the other hand it can be argued that the EU doesn’t undermine sovereignty of its member states as members maintain full control over critical policy domains.

• In areas including national defence, health, education, and taxation, the EU can’t decide a policy without an agreement from all member states. This gives them a veto and means they maintain sovereignty over the most important powers of a state.

  • Each country’s military remains fully under national control, with no EU-led standing army or requirements, allowing countries like France and Poland to conduct independent defence operations.

  • Similarly in education, member states set their own curriculums and funding levels, preserving cultural and educational autonomy.

    • For example, France maintains a highly centralised education system where curriculum and standards are set at the national level, while Germany allows for each federal state to determine its own policies.

• Additionally, the principle of subsidiarity further protects national sovereignty by ensuring that decisions are made at the most local level possible, meaning the EU can only act if objectives cannot be effectively achieved by individual states.

  • This principle is designed to limit the EU’s authority to areas where collective action is genuinely necessary, allowing member states to retain sovereignty in areas where they are best independent.

• Further, when new EU treaties are introduced, member states can negotiate opt-outs from specific EU policies, which allow them to maintain control in areas deemed essential.

  • Denmark, for example, opted out of adopting the Euro and continued to use Danish Krone, preserving its independent monetary policy.

P2 - EU’s commitment to an ever closer union - reduced sovereignty

• Another argument that the EU undermines the sovereignty of member states is that it is committed to an ever closer union and has gradually reduced the sovereignty of member states over time, as seen in particular with the growing importance of Qualified Majority Voting.

• The EU’s commitment to an ‘ever closer union’ is stated in the Treaty of Rome and reaffirmed in the Maastricht Treat, committing member states to a vision of deeper integration.

  • Key EU leaders, such as former European Commission President, Jean-Claude Juncker, and French President Emmanuel Macron, have advocated for deeper EU integration and a stronger centralised governance structure.

    • This drive for strategic autonomy was advanced in December 2025, with the EU providing a plan on how to achieve it. It is centred around deeper defence cooperation and strengthening the role of the European Defence Fund.

    • The continued ideological commitment to an ‘ever closer union’ suggests there will be a continued shift toward federalisation, where national sovereignty will be diluted further as decision making power will be transferred over to supranational EU institutions.

• The commitment to an ever closer union can be seen in the increasing use of Qualified Majority Voting since the EU was founded, which undermines sovereignty as states can be forced to accept decisions they disagree with.

  • QMV enables EU legislation to be passed by a ‘double majority’ in the Council of the European Union rather than requiring unanimity, which means that countries can be outvoted and cannot veto critical policies.

  • A double majority require 55% of member states to vote in favour, whilst these member states must represent at least 65% of the EU population.

    • Over the years, QMV has been extended to include areas like immigration, trade, and climate policy, resulting in more decisions where individual states cannot exercise veto power.

    • The Lisbon Treaty expanded QMV to over 40 new areas, including judicial cooperation and energy policy, reducing decision making in more areas.

      • In 2015, under QMV, the EU approbated mandatory migrant relocation quotas, requiring countries like Hungary, Poland, and Czechia to accept a share of refugees, despite being strongly against it.

P2 - EU’s commitment to an ever closer union - increased pooled sovereignty

• On the other hand, it can be argued that this move to an ‘ever closer union has increased pooled sovereignty.

• By pooling their sovereignty with the EU, member states are given much greater global influence than they otherwise would have, including in relation to trade, climate policy, and geopolitics.

  • Acting as a bloc representing 15% of global GDP, the EU has negotiated major trade agreements that benefit all member states, such as the EU-Canada Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA), which eliminated tariffs on 98% of goods traded between the two regions.

  • Such agreements offer member states access to new markets, strengthened IP protections, and lower tariffs, enhancing growth for both large economies like Germany, and smaller economies like Estonia.

    • Without being a member of the EU, smaller states in particular would not have been able to negotiate these agreements and get such favourable terms.

• Further, in global organisations, such as the WTO, IMF, and WHO, the EU’s collective bargaining power allows member states to influence international standards on climate, digital policy, and health.

  • For example, the EU played a critical role in diapering the Paris Climate Accord by pushing for binding commitments to limit global warming by 1.5C, setting an ambitious precedent.

P3 - Influence of EU’s core institutions - limit states sovereignty due to supranationalism

• Eu undermines sovereignty of states as supranational institutions have significant control within the EU. This limits members state sovereignty as they lack a veto within these institutions.

  • Supranationalism is when member state agree to transfer some sovereignty to a central body that can make binding decisions on behalf of all member states.

  • The two most important EU supranational institutions are the ECB and the European Commission.

• The ECB dictates monetary policy for the 20 Eurozone countries, setting interest rates and managing inflation. This can be argued to remove the sovereignty of states as it removed a critical tool of economic control from national governments.

  • Countries like Italy, Germany, and Greece cannot independently adjust their monetary policy, despite having vert different economies with vastly different needs.

  • This lack of sovereignty was shown most clearly after the Eurozone Crisis, when Greece was forced to accept stringent austerity measures, imposed by the IMF, EU, and ECB as a condition for bailout packages.

    • This was despite the fact that they were deeply unpopular, which inevitably led to long-term economic hardship, including 25% GDP reduction, and youth unemployment rates exceeding 50%.

• The European Commission also has extensive authority to propose and enforce legislation across the Union, including related to trade, environmental standards and competition. It is the EU’s executive body, responsible for proposing and enforcing legislation, implementing decisions, and managing the EU’s budget.

  • As a supranational institution, it is empowered to take action against member states who violate EU rules.

  • For instance, Poland and Hungary have faced sanctions and funding cuts from the EC over alleged rule-of-law violations, highlighting the EC’s power to impose penalties.

  • Specifically, the EU has continued to withhold billions of Euros worth of funding from Hungary following the implementation of anti-LGBTQ legislation.

P3 - influence of EU’s core institutions - does not limit sovereignty due to intergovernmentalism

• On the other hand it can be argued that the EU hasn’t undermined member states sovereignty as its most powerful institutions where the most critical decisions happen are intergovernmental.

• The European Council, comprising the heads of state or government from each member state, is the primary decision-making body for key EU policies and its strategic direction, particularly in areas like foreign policy and security.

  • Decisions within the council require unanimity in almost all cases, meaning that every country has a veto in areas that could deeply impact national sovereignty, such as tax or constitutional matters.

  • In 2015, Ireland vetoed proposed EU changes to corporate tax rules, protecting its competitive low-tax regime from alteration.