The editorial to the symposium briefly contextualises current debates on the European ‘public sphere’ and/or on absence thereof. In light of concern with the EU's so-called ‘democratic deficit’, the issue of how to create a polis without a demos has focused, in part, on the role of the public sphere (Öffentlichkeit) with respect, for example, to the mass media, law, and organisations within civil society. The editorial introduces the individual papers and seeks to identify their potential contributions to academic and policy debate within and beyond the EU.

This article examines the idea that the EU could export its promotion of the public sphere. The Commission perception of the public sphere is unclear and the EU is not exporting a public sphere paradigm in any comprehensive manner. The EU nevertheless continues to attempt to export its integration experience. The concept of a public sphere is particularly pertinent to certain advanced democratic societies. Its exportability and relevance for other parts of the world are limited.

Understanding of the relationship between constitutionalism and democracy among legal and political philosophers reflects an idealised account of the US constitution and the nature of judicial review. This view is normatively and empirically flawed. The US constitution is built on pre-democratic assumptions and its counter-majoritarian checks and balances are largely regressive, benefitting privileged minorities over the underprivileged. By contrast, ‘actually existing democracy’, involving competing parties and majority rule, is constitutional in its process and effects, treating all with equal concern and respect, upholding rights and maintaining the rule of law. Judicial review undermines these beneficial qualities.

Following the establishment of citizenship as a compulsory component of the National Curriculum for pre-16 year-olds in England in 2002, attention has turned to the role that universities can play in cultivating civic values. Against this background, the POLiS project has been developing, piloting and evaluating free-to-access, web-based learning activities that aim not only to teach students about current academic debates on citizenship, but also to challenge them to consider their own role as citizens. This article describes the ambitions and principles of the project and the educational context within which it has evolved before turning to an analysis of the lessons that can be learnt from our experience for those wishing to promote the teaching of citizenship in higher education.

The Politics Active Research Learning Environment (PARLE) was a £250,000 project to develop multimedia learning materials aimed at politics postgraduate students. Although the project fulfilled all its ambitions, a number of lessons have been learned that might inform others wanting to use the multimedia route for their teaching. This paper considers some of the mistakes made, how they could have been avoided and lessons for the future production of collaborative projects such as PARLE.

The emergence of a pan-European public sphere based on a common language, discourse and media sphere is generally held to be unlikely, if not impossible. Research has therefore mainly focused on measuring different degrees of Europeanisation of existing national media spheres. In applied research however, the notion of ‘Europeanisation’ often remains very fuzzy. The new agenda of ‘Europeanisation’ has been mainly applied as a pragmatic research strategy. As such, it still lacks theoretical grounding and methodological coherence. With this in mind, the article will raise the question of standards. This regards first of all theoretical standards to determine how Europeanisation relates to the transformation of the national public sphere. Second, methodological standards indicating how to measure Europeanisation must be set. Finally, public-sphere research must critically address the question of normative standards to determine whether Europeanisation meets the criteria of democratic legitimacy.

Legal changes stimulated by economic liberalisation and European Union governance have led some observers to speak of the ‘Americanisation’ of European law. Focussing on the dynamics of legal change and resistance in European member states, this article questions the extent of trans-Atlantic legal convergence, noting six important differences between European and American law that are unlikely to disappear.

The creators of The Simpsons have constructed a model of society, one which due to the show's longevity and popularity can be used by the teacher of politics to illustrate key points of the curriculum. This article suggests three such uses of The Simpsons, namely the depiction of gender in society, the nature of politicians, and what can and cannot be banned with regard to public health.

In the 1990s most scholars saw European citizenship as a purely decorative and symbolic institution which added little new to the ‘pre-Maastricht’ regime of free movement rights. In addition, many felt the need to defend the primacy of national citizenship by highlighting the derivative nature and weak content of European citizenship. Accordingly, its transformative potential remained at the margins of the debate. Despite such assessments, European Union citizenship has matured as an institution, owing to a number of important interventions by the European Court of Justice and legislative initiatives, such as the Citizenship Directive (Dir 2004/38).

Adversarial legalism, an approach to law and regulation long considered distinctive to the US, is spreading across the European Union (EU). The EU's institutional structure and its ongoing project of market integration generate political incentives and functional pressures that encourage EU policy-makers to rely on adversarial legalism as an approach to governance.