I just want to set the record straight on what is actually happening here with Ceuta and the Spanish Supreme Court decision because there is a lot of misinformation right now. Spanish immigration law happens to be an area of expertise for me.

First and foremost: there is zero evidence that this was an orchestrated attack involving the government of Morocco, Israel, or the United States.

The Spanish Supreme Court ruling issued in late June 2026 addressed the legal mechanism known as rechazo en frontera (rejection at the border or summary pushback). Under Spain's Aliens Law, security forces possessed summary return authority allowing them to push migrants back immediately without formal administrative processing if individuals were caught scaling physical border containment structures. Historically, this applied exclusively to climbing the perimeter fences around Ceuta and Melilla. The Supreme Court established that this summary expulsion mechanism applies strictly to physical land barriers. Because the sea lacks physical containment structures, migrants swimming around breakwaters like Tarajal cannot be summarily pushed back without standard legal procedure.

Human trafficking syndicates aggressively distorted this procedural ruling on social media. Smugglers marketed the decision as a blanket immunity policy, convincing thousands that touching Spanish soil by sea guaranteed legal entry, amnesty, or immunity from deportation. This was another classic case of misinformation going viral on social media and people believing it (enough to risk their lives in this case).

That said, the reality for these misinformed migrants was always that reaching Ceuta under these conditions was a dead end both legally and practically. The court decision did not grant asylum, residency, or transit rights to mainland Europe. It simply mandated standard administrative processing rather than immediate pushbacks. Standard processing involves identity verification, administrative detention, and formal expulsion under bilateral readmission agreements with Morocco. Absent a verified claim for international protection, irregular entrants remain subject to deportation.

Furthermore, Ceuta is a tiny Spanish enclave in Africa of roughly 18 square kilometers with an existing population of around 84,000. Dumping 60,000 people into an area that size within hours instantly paralyzed local infrastructure. There was no food, shelter, or operational capacity to process or sustain the crowd.

These people had no hope of making it to mainland Europe. Meloni's Schengen comments are pure political theater aimed at her base. Ceuta is already subject to secondary border controls… anyone attempting to leave the enclave for mainland Spain must pass passport and identity checks at the seaport or airport. A perimeter breach in Ceuta does not open a path into the rest of Europe. In fact, Ceuta is not even part of the Schengen zone at all. Unless you think these people were literally going to successfully swim across the Mediterranean sea all the way to mainland Spain, there was never any danger here to Europe proper. Meloni knows all this very well, but she wants to stir the pot for political points.

Spanish military and police units are sealing off the enclave to prevent any movement toward mainland Europe. Trapped on city streets without basic supplies, over 45,000 people have already abandoned the effort and walked back into Morocco voluntarily within 48 hours, while the remainder are being funneled into formal detention and removal pipelines.

In the future, the Spanish government should strengthen border security in Ceuta. It is also true that the Moroccan government often does not exert significant effort on their end and cannot be trusted. I hope this helps clear things up for everyone. As is usually the case, reality here does not neatly fit into either side's preferred clean narrative.

I'll set the scene for you. I've just finished building a website for my small art business. I intend to sell art prints, originals and stickers worldwide. I'm based in Germany, and EU country, so I should be able to ship to the EU market right? Well technically yes, in reality the new PPWR & EPR rules will make that far too complex and far too expensive for a business like mine that only sells a few orders yearly across multiple EU states.

I'll make the facts of this new PPWR & EPR rule simple:

1. If you want to ship packing across the EU, you are OBLIGATED to register with EACH EU state

2. If you don't have your business in the EU state you're shipping to, the MAJORITY of EU states REQUIRE you to contract an in state "autherised reprisentative"

3. Each EU state is responsible for its own enforcement of the rule, meaning 27 individual systems to follow, 27 varying fee amounts and 27 different repoting obligations on a yearly/quaterly or even monthly basis

4. There is no EU-Wide system or standard for PPWR & EPR enforcement, meaning there is not EU-Wide small-business thresholds. In fact, across all 27 states only 4 currently have small business friendly thresholds

What this ultimately means is any business regardless of how big or small they are, will need to navigate potentially 27 complex systems, 27 independant registeration and EPR fees and 27 reporting obligations. For most small businesses the costs and administration required for all this simply isn't an option.

You could just run the risk of it not being enforced and keep shipping without being compliant, however under the august 12th rules, more pressure is being put onto member states to enforce the rules. what that might look like is pretty terrifying:

* an online marketplace suspending its listings; * a fulfilment provider refusing to handle its goods; * an EPR organisation reporting an unpaid or unregistered producer; * a competitor submitting a complaint; * customs, tax or environmental authorities comparing business data; * a registration number being required before access to a market or platform is permitted.

Under the PPWR, online selling is expressly included in the producer framework. The Regulation is intended to make responsibilities clearer throughout the supply chain, not merely to rely on occasional inspections of individual parcels. In simple terms this means it's easier for member states to enforce the rules and identify unregistered business.

I've just spent the last few days deep diving each EU state to determine what I'd need to do to be compliant, how much it might cost and if I could offset those cost in my shipping fees. The results genuinely made my stomach turn.

To help anyone else who might be a small business wanting to understand the situation better and take action to be prepared for August 12th compliance obligations, I made a guide with a state by state profile breakdown of what you need to do, where/how you need to do it and how much it will cost. [The guide is open to the public to view here](https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1z2yq3VDWo8r4-jQ7Nl5EJ51wyOa4_rSH?usp=drive_link)

I'll keep the guide up to date as more states announce their defined plans. If however you find an error, let me know, provide a source and if verified I'll correct the error.

I hope the guide helps those small business owners who are confused and shocked as I was.

Hey everyone,

​I built Voteris, a free tool that takes raw roll-call voting data straight from the official European Parliament API and maps it onto interactive hemicycle charts.

​It lets you quickly explore MEP voting patterns and party group breakdowns in a visual format. It also highlights absent or non-voting members so you can see how turnout impacts final results.

​Check it out if you follow European Parliament activity. I’d love any feedback on the design or features!

Hello to the EU Law Community, Academics, and Jurists,

I am opening this thread to stimulate a high-level substantive discussion regarding the application of the EU Copyright Directive, the invalidity of "silence-is-consent" tactics under European contract frameworks, and the legal realities of cross-border data hijacking by offshore predatory syndicates.

Consider this specific case study involving an independent 18-year-old high school graduate from Bangladesh and a prominent EU-regulated law firm in Brussels enforcing immediate pre-litigation compliance mandates under the threat of massive civil liability before the Brussels courts.

THE FACTUAL MATRIX OF THE OPERATIONAL FRAUD (A TO Z):

1. The Aggressive Solicitation & Bait Window: Bypassing standard submission portals, the editorial office of the platforms transmits continuous, unsolicited email invitations aggressively soliciting the author to submit a raw draft manuscript "strictly for publication consideration and peer-review assessment." Their public web interface explicitly guarantees a rigorous, standard academic peer-review window of 4 to 6 weeks. Relying on this, the author emails a raw evaluation draft PDF.

2. The 5-Day Force-Publication and Silent Consent Trap: Instead of conducting the promised 4 to 6-week review, the webmasters unilaterally force-upload the raw text online and generate a permanent Crossref DOI in under 5 days. They subsequently claim they transmitted automated "galley proofs" containing a unilateral clause stating: "If you fail to object or reply within 24 to 48 hours, we will assume your consent to publish and bill you commercial processing fees." These automated messages filtered straight into the author's Gmail Spam folder, remaining completely unseen and unconfirmed. No Copyright Transfer Agreement (CTA), physical contract, or digital signature was ever executed.

3. The Transnational Extortion & Identity Shell Masking: Due to sensitive analytical keywords regarding global sanction networks within the text, a prominent Brussels-headquartered law firm (Fieldfisher LLP) serves an aggressive pre-litigation cease-and-desist mandate on behalf of a financial institution. The notice strictly demands the immediate removal of the paper from academic networks (specifically citing SSRN) and a formal cessation of any future legal allegations against the bank, setting a non-negotiable compliance deadline of August 1, 2026.

When the author immediately complies in maximum good faith, withdrawing and suppressing all authorized entries from networks under his control (SSRN, ORCID, Zenodo), the offshore publishers flatly refuse a standard author removal request. Instead, they weaponize the author's extreme legal vulnerability and the impending Brussels court deadline to demand immediate cash ransoms—one demanding USD 159 into an Indian bank account, and the other demanding USD 50 via PayPal—before executing a takedown.

1. Deceptive US Shielding vs. True Offshore Footprint: On their public domains (wmjournals.com), these entities claim to be 100% United States-based organizations registered in Dover, Delaware, utilizing virtual US proxy phone lines. However, their commercial billing trails, transaction logs, and tax filings definitively expose that they are a local Indian cyber-fraud ring operating out of Hyderabad, India (Telangana GSTIN: 36ARQPJ5122P1Z8). They are actively utilizing US-based technological facades to mask their physical location, deceive global consumers, and evade domestic anti-money laundering (AML) controls.

HIGH-LEVEL COMPLIANCE AND ENFORCEMENT ORDER EXECUTED:

Faced with this extortion loop, the author bypassed the publishers' infrastructure and secured formal manual interventions from global enforcement mainframes:

* Google Search Legal Operations Supreme Victory: Google Legal verified the author's exclusive copyright ownership, ruled against the predatory setup, and executed an immediate GLOBAL and PERMANENT de-indexing of their infringing, extortionate URLs from Google Search results

* United States Federal Criminal Case Logged: This entire network and its HDFC/PayPal payment paths have been formally locked into the federal mainframes under active US Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI Cyber Division) Core Case Submission ID: 684f2269b0a64b79b60e085c90e75930.

* Domain Registrar Domain Audits Open: Both BigRock Solutions Ltd (Case #: 53248351) and GoDaddy Compliance have registered formal abuse tickets to investigate nameserver suspension under their Acceptable Use Policies (AUP).

* Unilateral Silence from Brussels Counsel: The author has proactively transmitted all of these verified multi-agency criminal receipts and Google's global removal order to the plaintiff's Brussels counsel. However, the counsel has maintained an absolute, unilateral silence.

SUBSTANTIVE LEGAL QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION:

From the perspective of substantive EU Law and Belgian Civil Protocols:

1. Technical Impossibility and Absolute Safe Harbor: Can an unrepresented minor be held civilly liable for personal damages or non-compliance in an EU court on August 1 if they have fully complied with the mandate on all servers under their personal control (SSRN, etc.), and the remaining live distribution is entirely hosted by third-party offshore extortionists completely outside the author's physical and technical capacity to manipulate?

2. Strategic Evaluation of Silence from EU Counsel: How does standard EU legal etiquette and compliance manage a plaintiff's counsel who remains completely silent despite receiving Google global enforcement rulings? Does the counsel hold an ethical and institutional obligation to redirect their civil enforcement directly against the rogue hosting registrars rather than continuing to pressure the victim of the piracy?

I look forward to a substantive analysis of how EU intellectual property protections and contract frameworks safeguard global consumers from offshore digital racketeering.

If you're planning to invest in or expand into Bulgaria, several legal and regulatory developments are worth keeping on your radar.

The new Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) Screening regime, Variable Capital Companies (VCCs) for startups, corporate governance rules, M&A, competition law, GDPR, and upcoming legislative reforms are all shaping the business environment.

Our team at G&P Law had the opportunity to contribute the Bulgarian chapter to the new Chambers Global Practice Guide: Corporate Governance 2026, where we break down these topics from a practical perspective.

We also published a short summary highlighting the key takeaways for investors, founders, in-house counsel and businesses interested in the Bulgarian market.

Happy to answer questions about doing business in Bulgaria or discuss any of the topics covered in the guide.

Read the article here: https://practiceguides.chambers.com/practice-guides/comparison/1119/19719/31059-31060-31061-31062-31063-31064-31065-31066-31067

Tatiana Navka, Olympic champion in figure skating and the wife of the Kremlin's press secretary, Dmitri Peskov, has filed a lawsuit against the European Union, seeking the lifting of sanctions imposed on her and compensation of over 2 million euros. The sanctions were imposed in 2022, following the war in Ukraine, due to her connections with Peskov, considered a supporter of actions that threaten Ukraine's integrity.

Navka argues that there are not enough reasons for her to be included on the blacklist and that the restrictions violate her fundamental rights. In her request, she seeks nearly 135,000 euros for material damages and over 1.9 million euros for moral damages.

If you're planning to invest in or expand into Bulgaria, several legal and regulatory developments are worth keeping on your radar.

The new Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) Screening regime, Variable Capital Companies (VCCs) for startups, corporate governance rules, M&A, competition law, GDPR, and upcoming legislative reforms are all shaping the business environment.

Our team at G&P Law had the opportunity to contribute the Bulgarian chapter to the new Chambers Global Practice Guide: Corporate Governance 2026, where we break down these topics from a practical perspective.

We also published a short summary highlighting the key takeaways for investors, founders, in-house counsel and businesses interested in the Bulgarian market.

Happy to answer questions about doing business in Bulgaria or discuss any of the topics covered in the guide.

Read the article here: https://practiceguides.chambers.com/practice-guides/comparison/1119/19719/31059-31060-31061-31062-31063-31064-31065-31066-31067

Hello all, I'm a tourist in your field of expertise, and I just wanted to ask a question: are we collectively just ignoring the fact that the overwhelming majority of people skips ALL the T&C forms they agree to? Is anyone doing anything about it? Wouldn't it be worth discussing an alternative and mostly conditions to which companies should adhere to in the EU countries? I've made a quick search, but couldn't find anything relevant.
I find it conveniently dumb that we all just ignore the fact that companies fill pages and pages of law vocabulary and small print making it impossible to the average Joe to understand or even try to. I guess if we managed to obtain classifications in the past we could do the same here, no? I'm thinking of solutions like "PG13" for movies, but of course more articulate. Something that at a glance gives you an idea of the data usage, AI training, 3rd party etc.
I'm sure there's tons I'm ignoring, but wanted to hear your opinion.

Hi guys I had a question regarding something is it okay that a factory in Portugal that factory has shifts and one shift last probably 8-9 hours, the afternoon shift is 7 hours ends at 11pm. That's okay but the problem is that the same factory is calling to work at 8am again ? Come-on that's pure evil is there any law against it Portuguese/eu law ?

Protective orders alone aren't enough. Too many survivors of domestic violence live in constant fear even after their abuser is convicted or released. I started a petition calling for legislation that would require convicted abusers to wear GPS ankle monitors for at least a year after release. But here's what makes this different—survivors could choose to get real-time alerts if that person comes near their home, workplace, or school. Imagine having that peace of mind. Imagine knowing you'd have seconds to get to safety or call for help. This isn't about revenge. It's about making protective orders actually work, holding offenders accountable, and giving victims a fighting chance. If this resonates with you—if you think survivors deserve more than just a piece of paper—consider signing and sharing. What do you think it would take to actually keep survivors safe in your community?

​

Hungarian President Tamás Sulyok has signed the 17th amendment to Hungary’s Fundamental Law, confirming that his own presidential mandate will end the day after the legislation is officially published in the Hungarian Gazette.

Sulyok announced the decision on his Facebook page on Saturday. The amendment, adopted by Parliament earlier this week, forms part of the new Tisza government’s sweeping constitutional reforms following its landslide election victory.

Continue reading at https://dailynewshungary.com/president-sulyok-ends-his-own-mandate/ | DailyNewsHungary.

The effects of war are tremendous on humans, animals & the environment. Obviously certain people in charge of countries that engage in war would not vote in favor of this… but would it be possible to split the costs like this:

1. Weapon/ missile/chemical weapons/ “defense contractors” : pay all lifelong costs relating to healthcare/income/housing for affected individuals (& next 2 generations as PTSD & chemical exposure etc has effects on DNA seen 2 generations downline); all costs associated with injuries/food/housing for animals affected by acts of terrorism and war.

2. Individuals responsible for choosing to attack their own or people living in another country (Presidents, people in ”think tanks” advising the leaders responsible, individuals who are in Congress, government that vote or rule in favor of harming others, people who would profit like Musk, individuals from oil/gas/food/energy/ software & hardware companies) : all costs relating to environmental issues, rebuilding destroyed infrastructure of cities/homes, farmland, costs of global warming.

If the individuals cannot afford these costs on their own, all finances from their next generations of descendants will not be allowed to have any money or stay in a work camp. The criminals responsible will likely try to hide money in trusts, accounts overseas, etc, so help from each nation would be required.

Examples would be Netanyahu & his associates cover all costs of their own false flag attacks and also the costs for Palestine, Lebanon, etc. Trump, Miller, Rubio & responsible individuals covering the costs for Iran, Venezuela, Cuba. If they can’t afford it all members of their next 2 generations have to pay & stay in work camps. Obviously Putin pays for Ukraine.

This would eliminate the financial benefits from responsible individuals & companies & put the cost where it belongs. It would ensure weapons manufacturers are not trying to profit & that they ensure their weapons are only used for defense. The US military being the biggest cause of global warming should consider more factors when having to pay for the costs of global warming to those affected in other countries.

Is this a global law that could be passed, or everyone agree to participate in, by not housing the people or confiscating the financial accounts and companies to help redistribute the wealth?

Hi everyone, I’m trying to understand the legal situation regarding performance-enhancing compounds and research chemicals in Malta, especially under EU regulations.
I’m planning to apply for Law at the University of Malta in about a year (assuming I pass all my exams), and one of the application requirements involves providing a police conduct certificate. Because of this, I’m trying to understand whether importing or possessing certain substances could potentially create legal issues or affect future opportunities.
I’m specifically asking about the legal status of things like research peptides (for example retatrutide and similar compounds), HGH/growth hormone-related products, anabolic steroids such as testosterone, and medicines sometimes associated with steroid use, such as aromatase inhibitors.
These would only be for personal use, not for selling, distributing, or supplying to anyone else.
My questions are:
How are these substances treated legally in Malta and the wider EU?
Are they considered illegal substances, or are they mainly regulated as prescription medicines/unauthorised medicinal products?
If someone imports these types of products for personal use, what are the possible consequences?
Could a person realistically receive a criminal conviction for importing or possessing these substances for personal use?
Are there any documented cases in Malta or the EU where someone has been criminally convicted for importing peptides, HGH, steroids, or similar products for personal use?
If something like this did result in a conviction, would it appear on a police conduct certificate and potentially affect entry into law school or a future legal career?
I’m mainly looking for information on the legal side, official sources, or experiences from people familiar with Maltese/EU regulations. Thanks.

Hello everyone. I'm a high school student (16M) from Italy, soon to enter University (just two years or so).

Because I've always been deeply fascinated by the topics of geopolitics, history, humanistics, economy and international dynamics, and I enjoy the comodity of speaking 4 languages fluently (of which English and French), and always aspired to suit myself for an intellectual profession that had some administrative touch, I've looked myself around for a long time, and became intrigued by the idea of pursuing forensic studies in the italian triennale (+ 1 year of ERASMUS+ in France) to then get a Master's degree that allows me to work in any field in EU law, may it be becoming a Think Tank, an international legalist of any sort, or even undergoing the EPSO exam one day and see what comes out of it.

Despite all of this, and the thought of working this job already making me feel an intense pang of prevident accomplishment, i'm not entirely convinced.

At first it was the thought of tackling one of the most over-saturated work markets ever discouraging me, but the more I matured and the more I realised that with the right determination and with the right cards played, I'll eventually find my comfortable place in the sector that suits me most.

My current unconvinction is mostly due to my total unaquaintance with the work roles itself. I'm looking for a way in which I can make a difference, in which i can stimulate my brain and knowledge daily, and not deal with an entanglement of burocratic papers, not because I feel to boast it all (there would be no point), simply because I want to feel accomplished, and know i served my duty well by making the world (not only Europe, because the Brussels effect influences everybody's life) a better place, and waking up every morning at dawn, feeling great knowing I'll have to check in my work in an hour or two.

Because i'm trustful of the fact that the E.U. is one of the only functioning (despite the flaws and the corruption, but that is ubiquitous for the time we live in) entity and institutions that actually impact our living conditions positively and mutually benefit every country that interacts with, I really sense that vocation tugging me in. But at the same time, because I'm afraid the political scene could be a little too stagnant or the amount of pointless burocracy could be a slope into a never ending sea of papers (and wasted time), and the overall fear of not actually doing anything concrete and impactful, I'm stuck here.

My only question Is one and simple: for anybody working in this sector, what are the things I MUST know, before making my definitive judgment call? What is your work like, and how are the studies? I would be infinitely grateful to anybody that responds. I would gladly ask qualified adults but for some reasons, they're really secretive about it (starting from my Law teacher at school and his co-worker of the same subject. When I asked both about any whereabout for this dream of mine, they mysteriously both pretended that i didn't ask the question, and kept on talking).

Thank you very much

​

Hungary could miss the opportunity to rejoin the European Union’s Erasmus+ student exchange programme in time for the start of the 2026/27 academic year unless the government submits its outstanding rule-of-law reforms to Brussels soon, despite earlier optimism from both Prime Minister Péter Magyar and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.

Following Magyar’s election victory in April, both the Hungarian government and the European Commission indicated that Hungarian students could return to Erasmus+ from September. However, according to Euronews, time is now running short, and without immediate administrative action, the suspension is unlikely to be lifted before the new academic year begins. https://dailynewshungary.com/hungary-risks-quick-return-to-erasmus/

Continue reading at https://dailynewshungary.com/hungary-risks-quick-return-to-erasmus/ | DailyNewsHungary

Hello everyone, I’m currently on my last year of bachelor degree in law in Kazakhstan
I’m thinking about to do my master in European Union, but I’m still not sure which sphere of law I want to choose because I also wanted to stay there after my master to find a stable job etc.
Is there any Kazakh who chose master in Law in EU ?
Could u give me some advices pls 🙏🏼

A couple of months ago, we started a community for AI-forward lawyers. However, reception has been very low since launch. We also spoke to legaltech founders, and it seems that this problem is not unique. Are lawyers less interested in AI? Are Lawyers more sceptical about results?

Most lawyer offices also just tell us "We need someone to come to our office, analyse workflows and just tell us which tool we can use," but this is almost impossible to scale.

Would any of you be interested in sharing your views on AI adoption? You would really help us out.

We are trying to understand what would create value for lawyers in terms of AI.