Questioning ‘primacy’: A proposal for a systematic understanding of ‘identitarian arguments’ in national constitutional case-law

Multiple national constitutional courts are raising ‘identitarian arguments’ to counter primacy as the ‘fundamental and political structure’ of State concerned comes at stake. This work questions whether such arguments acceptable, which extent, from perspective evolution occurred in legal interpretation during European integration process. It appears that their persuasiveness is most intense if they designed rights resist aiming protect restore overall balance Union has achieved. In this vein, violations substantive interests should be considered relation with respective procedural breaches sovereignty. As long both elements involved, identitarian arguments, albeit preventing uniformity application law, do not preclude further but keep it line balance  underpins Union’s arrangements; therefore, must held consistent law governing legal-political space.