Ester Herlin-Karnell is Professor in EU Law, University Research Chair of EU Constitutional Law and Justice, and the Director of the VU Centre for European Legal Studies at the Free University of Amsterdam.

The analysis presented in the book provides more classic discussion points around the AFSJ with robust philosophical foundations. The conceptual richness of the volume sparks a number of follow-up questions that will be hopefully investigated in the future. This piece of scholarship fills a gap in the existing literature by offering a more systemic understanding of the functioning of the AFSJ, and offers an original angle to assess long-standing questions of constitutional relevance.

• PART I1. Introduction I. The Idea of the Book II. The Structure of the Book III. Why Constitutionalism Matters for Constructing the AFSJ Sphere IV. Introduction to the Contested Concept of Justice and the EU Security Status Quo V. Justice, EU Legal Debate and the External Aspect VI. Conclusion 2. The Concept of Non-domination in the EU Security-related Context I. Introduction II. The Concept of ‘Freedom as Non-domination’ as a Constitutional Set-up: Charting the Main Debate III. Non-domination, Justice and EU Security Regulation IV. Legitimacy and Justification V. Judicial Review and Non-domination VI. Translating the ‘Non-domination’ Question to the Supranational EU Level and its Relevance for EU Security Regulation VII. Introduction to the Links between Justification and Proportionality in the Context of Non-domination VIII. Conclusion PART II3. The Right to Justification, Justice and the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice I. Introduction II. Justice as a Contested Concept III. Justice and on the Constitutional Structure IV. The Idea of Justification, Democracy and the Question of Legitimacy V. The Ideal and Non-ideal Picture of Justice VI. Constitutional Essentials, Public Reason and Judicial Review II. Same for States and Citizens? The EU Context VIII. Conclusion 4. Proportionality and Reasonable Disagreement in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice I. Introduction II. Proportionality in the AFSJ and Beyond III. Proportionality Discourse: Introductory Remarks to a Grand Debate IV. An Umbrella Principle of Proportionality in EU Law V. Proportionality on the EU Legislative Table VI. The New Contours of Proportionality within the AFSJ: Case Law VII. Critique and Appraisal of the Principle VIII. The Turn to Justification: Proportionality as Reasonable Disagreement IX. Proportionality and Justice as a Force for Good AFSJ Structure? X. Conclusion: Non-domination Utilised Through Proportionality? PART III5. The Right to Justification, Territoriality and Migration, Refugees and Terrorism I. Introduction II. The Decent Society and its Borders: Some Key Debates Explored III. Migration Ethics and the AFSJ Challenge IV. Anti-terrorism, Security and Prevention V. Adjudication and Security in Real Time VI. Agencies and the Accountability Deficit VII. What Kind of Justification for What Kind of Solidarity? VIII. Conclusion 6. The Dimensions of Constitutional Justice: The Multi-Speed Scenario I. Introduction II. Justice and Fragmentation: Cherry-picking AFSJ Standards III. Constitutional Justice, Trust and the CJEU IV. The Court of Justice as a Trustee Court in the AFSJ? V. National Courts and Fiduciary Obligations: When the EU Standard is not Robust Enough VI. Conclusion 7. Conclusion I. Conclusion II. The Justification of the Book

Ester Herlin-Karnell is Professor in EU Law, University Research Chair of EU Constitutional Law and Justice, and the Director of the VU Centre for European Legal Studies at the Free University of Amsterdam.

The analysis presented in the book provides more classic discussion points around the AFSJ with robust philosophical foundations. The conceptual richness of the volume sparks a number of follow-up questions that will be hopefully investigated in the future. This piece of scholarship fills a gap in the existing literature by offering a more systemic understanding of the functioning of the AFSJ, and offers an original angle to assess long-standing questions of constitutional relevance.

• PART I1. Introduction I. The Idea of the Book II. The Structure of the Book III. Why Constitutionalism Matters for Constructing the AFSJ Sphere IV. Introduction to the Contested Concept of Justice and the EU Security Status Quo V. Justice, EU Legal Debate and the External Aspect VI. Conclusion 2. The Concept of Non-domination in the EU Security-related Context I. Introduction II. The Concept of ‘Freedom as Non-domination’ as a Constitutional Set-up: Charting the Main Debate III. Non-domination, Justice and EU Security Regulation IV. Legitimacy and Justification V. Judicial Review and Non-domination VI. Translating the ‘Non-domination’ Question to the Supranational EU Level and its Relevance for EU Security Regulation VII. Introduction to the Links between Justification and Proportionality in the Context of Non-domination VIII. Conclusion PART II3. The Right to Justification, Justice and the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice I. Introduction II. Justice as a Contested Concept III. Justice and on the Constitutional Structure IV. The Idea of Justification, Democracy and the Question of Legitimacy V. The Ideal and Non-ideal Picture of Justice VI. Constitutional Essentials, Public Reason and Judicial Review II. Same for States and Citizens? The EU Context VIII. Conclusion 4. Proportionality and Reasonable Disagreement in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice I. Introduction II. Proportionality in the AFSJ and Beyond III. Proportionality Discourse: Introductory Remarks to a Grand Debate IV. An Umbrella Principle of Proportionality in EU Law V. Proportionality on the EU Legislative Table VI. The New Contours of Proportionality within the AFSJ: Case Law VII. Critique and Appraisal of the Principle VIII. The Turn to Justification: Proportionality as Reasonable Disagreement IX. Proportionality and Justice as a Force for Good AFSJ Structure? X. Conclusion: Non-domination Utilised Through Proportionality? PART III5. The Right to Justification, Territoriality and Migration, Refugees and Terrorism I. Introduction II. The Decent Society and its Borders: Some Key Debates Explored III. Migration Ethics and the AFSJ Challenge IV. Anti-terrorism, Security and Prevention V. Adjudication and Security in Real Time VI. Agencies and the Accountability Deficit VII. What Kind of Justification for What Kind of Solidarity? VIII. Conclusion 6. The Dimensions of Constitutional Justice: The Multi-Speed Scenario I. Introduction II. Justice and Fragmentation: Cherry-picking AFSJ Standards III. Constitutional Justice, Trust and the CJEU IV. The Court of Justice as a Trustee Court in the AFSJ? V. National Courts and Fiduciary Obligations: When the EU Standard is not Robust Enough VI. Conclusion 7. Conclusion I. Conclusion II. The Justification of the Book

Ester Herlin-Karnell is Professor in EU Law, University Research Chair of EU Constitutional Law and Justice, and the Director of the VU Centre for European Legal Studies at the Free University of Amsterdam.

The analysis presented in the book provides more classic discussion points around the AFSJ with robust philosophical foundations. The conceptual richness of the volume sparks a number of follow-up questions that will be hopefully investigated in the future. This piece of scholarship fills a gap in the existing literature by offering a more systemic understanding of the functioning of the AFSJ, and offers an original angle to assess long-standing questions of constitutional relevance.

• PART I1. Introduction I. The Idea of the Book II. The Structure of the Book III. Why Constitutionalism Matters for Constructing the AFSJ Sphere IV. Introduction to the Contested Concept of Justice and the EU Security Status Quo V. Justice, EU Legal Debate and the External Aspect VI. Conclusion 2. The Concept of Non-domination in the EU Security-related Context I. Introduction II. The Concept of ‘Freedom as Non-domination’ as a Constitutional Set-up: Charting the Main Debate III. Non-domination, Justice and EU Security Regulation IV. Legitimacy and Justification V. Judicial Review and Non-domination VI. Translating the ‘Non-domination’ Question to the Supranational EU Level and its Relevance for EU Security Regulation VII. Introduction to the Links between Justification and Proportionality in the Context of Non-domination VIII. Conclusion PART II3. The Right to Justification, Justice and the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice I. Introduction II. Justice as a Contested Concept III. Justice and on the Constitutional Structure IV. The Idea of Justification, Democracy and the Question of Legitimacy V. The Ideal and Non-ideal Picture of Justice VI. Constitutional Essentials, Public Reason and Judicial Review II. Same for States and Citizens? The EU Context VIII. Conclusion 4. Proportionality and Reasonable Disagreement in the Area of Freedom, Security and Justice I. Introduction II. Proportionality in the AFSJ and Beyond III. Proportionality Discourse: Introductory Remarks to a Grand Debate IV. An Umbrella Principle of Proportionality in EU Law V. Proportionality on the EU Legislative Table VI. The New Contours of Proportionality within the AFSJ: Case Law VII. Critique and Appraisal of the Principle VIII. The Turn to Justification: Proportionality as Reasonable Disagreement IX. Proportionality and Justice as a Force for Good AFSJ Structure? X. Conclusion: Non-domination Utilised Through Proportionality? PART III5. The Right to Justification, Territoriality and Migration, Refugees and Terrorism I. Introduction II. The Decent Society and its Borders: Some Key Debates Explored III. Migration Ethics and the AFSJ Challenge IV. Anti-terrorism, Security and Prevention V. Adjudication and Security in Real Time VI. Agencies and the Accountability Deficit VII. What Kind of Justification for What Kind of Solidarity? VIII. Conclusion 6. The Dimensions of Constitutional Justice: The Multi-Speed Scenario I. Introduction II. Justice and Fragmentation: Cherry-picking AFSJ Standards III. Constitutional Justice, Trust and the CJEU IV. The Court of Justice as a Trustee Court in the AFSJ? V. National Courts and Fiduciary Obligations: When the EU Standard is not Robust Enough VI. Conclusion 7. Conclusion I. Conclusion II. The Justification of the Book