From Legal to Political Reasoning: National Parliaments' Use of Reasoned Opinions in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice*
研究了国家议会在欧盟自由、安全与司法领域如何运用附理由意见提出辅助性质疑，发现其推理类型更多取决于欧盟提案的制度演变和实质范围，而非议会自身制度实力。
Abstract The Lisbon Treaty emphasized the importance of subsidiarity control in relation to the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice (AFSJ). The article demonstrates that the types of reasoning national parliaments use to raise subsidiarity objections in the AFSJ depend less on the institutional strength of national parliaments in EU affairs and more on the institutional evolution and material scope of EU proposals. Relying on the AFSJ case, the article shows that national parliaments use a narrow legal interpretation of subsidiarity when the EU legislation threatens Member States' legal traditions and State powers. However, concerns about the respect of national legal diversity are replaced by a more political approach to subsidiarity control when politically sensitive and contentious issues are at stake.