Officiële Vlaamse cijfers tonen daling van uitstoot houtkachels, maar metingen op het terrein wijzen op stijging van 44% van schadelijke stoffen.
Vlaanderen rapporteert foutieve uitstootcijfers aan Europa door gebrekkige registratie en verouderde meetmodellen, en onderschat zo gezondheidsrisico’s.
Course description available here: www.ulb.be/en/programme...
24.02.2026 13:08 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0It’s an exciting interdisciplinary journey — and I’m looking forward to learning a great deal from our students and from my co‑lecturer along the way.
24.02.2026 13:08 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0For the next couple of weeks, I’ll be teaching EU trade law at the Université libre de Bruxelles. Together with Dr Chrissopighi Braila from the Solvay Brussels School of Economics and Management, I’ll be guiding students through the fascinating intersection of law and economics in EU trade policy.
24.02.2026 13:08 — 👍 1 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0The Supreme Court Ruling against legality of over half of tariffs levied last year likely invalidates any “deals” cut by other counties to lower the tariffs.
20.02.2026 16:37 — 👍 55 🔁 13 💬 0 📌 1Posted without comment. The USA Supreme Court tariff decision. Weekend reading sorted. www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/25p...
20.02.2026 15:39 — 👍 1 🔁 2 💬 1 📌 0
There is no exception to the major questions doctrine for emergency statutes. Nor does the fact that tariffs implicate foreign affairs render the doctrine inapplicable. The Framers gave “Congress alone” the power to impose tariffs during peacetime. Merritt v. Welsh, 104 U. S. 694, 700. And the foreign affairs implications of tariffs do not make it any more likely that Congress would relinquish its tariff power through vague language, or without careful limits.
(a) IEEPA authorizes the President to “investigate, block during the pendency of an investigation, regulate, direct and compel, nullify, void, prevent or prohibit . . . importation or exportation.” §1702(a)(1)(B). Absent from this lengthy list of specific powers is any mention of tariffs or duties. Had Congress intended to convey the distinct and extraordinary power to impose tariffs, it would have done so expressly, as it consistently has in other tariff statutes. The power to “regulate . . . importation” does not fill that void. The term “regulate,” as ordinarily used, means to “fix, establish, or control; to adjust by rule, method, or established mode; to direct by rule or restriction; to subject to governing principles or laws.” Black’s Law Dictionary 1156. The facial breadth of this definition places in stark relief what ”regulate” is not usually thought to include: taxation. Many statutes grant the Executive the power to “regulate.” Yet the Government cannot identify any statute in which the power to regulate includes the power to tax. The Court is therefore skeptical that in IEEPA—and IEEPA alone—Congress hid a delegation of its birth-right power to tax within the quotidian power to “regulate.” While taxes may accomplish regulatory ends, it does not follow that the power to regulate includes the power to tax as a means of regulation. Indeed, when Congress addresses both the power to regulate and the power to tax, it does so separately and expressly. That it did not do so here is strong evidence that “regulate” in IEEPA does not include taxation.
Supreme Court absolutely bodies Trump on IEEPA.
Just complete groin kicking.
They could have said that IEEPA lets him impose tariffs in an emergency but that this didn't qualify as one of those, or he failed to define one.
It didn't.
It ruled IEEPA doesn't let him impose tariffs at all.
Two Canadian officials involved in the U.S. trade discussions, who spoke anonymously to frankly convey their impressions of the state of the talks, said expectations in Ottawa for a full renewal of the U.S.M.C.A. were very low. Mr. Carney’s team, they said, even questions whether it could trust any fresh trade agreements with Mr. Trump. The Canadian government, they said, is preparing for long, bumpy and dramatic talks with a hostile U.S. administration, and even for a breakup of the U.S.M.C.A. Mr. Trump repeatedly said last year that he wanted Canada to become part of the United States — calling it the 51st state — and that he was prepared to use “economic force” to get the country to heed his wishes. Mr. Carney was elected last spring on a pledge to stand up to Mr. Trump. He said at the time that the president wanted to “break us so that America can own us.” Despite some positive interactions between Mr. Trump and Mr. Carney, Canadian officials said they believed that Mr. Trump wanted to weaken Canada economically to force it to give up some protectionist policies it preserved in previous trade talks.
woof, the view from ottawa
19.02.2026 16:00 — 👍 63 🔁 17 💬 4 📌 3
‘In het parlement gaf Weyts toe dat de ambitie om de belastingdruk niet te verhogen "niet eenvoudig is en noopt ons tot creativiteit en voorzichtigheid".’
Anders gesteld: de VL regering zoekt naar opties om de Europese vrij verkeersregels te omzeilen.
Loyaal is anders.
vrtnws.be/p.XEGw7aNGO
Very courageous move by the Spanish government. A recognition of the contribution migrants make to the Spanish economy and to Spanish society and, as the catholic church put it: an act of social justice.
www.france24.com/en/live-news...
📢Publication alert 📢 : "Effective judicial protection in the CFSP after KS and KD", published open access in the Maastricht Journal of European and Comparative Law.
journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...
“On plurilateral trade, we're championing efforts to build a bridge between the Trans-Pacific Partnership and the European Union, which would create a new trading block of 1.5 billion people.”
www.cbc.ca/news/politic...
While everybody is busy proclaiming the end of the transatlantic alliance, I thought it was a good moment to write about the potential of closer ties with the EU's other transatlantic partner, Canada.🍁
www.thomasverellen.com/blog/beyond-...
MEPs in trade committee consider postponing a vote to eliminate tariffs on US industrial goods import & quotas for US ag products
#Greenland #EUUS
By @robfranciseu.bsky.social
Lots of talk about the end of international law, the death of multilateralism, deglobalization, etc, but here we have Europe and South America creating a huge free trade zone.
www.nytimes.com/2026/01/09/b...
The US abducts a head of state — a clear breach of international law. But this isn’t its “death.” States violate the rules, yet far more often they follow them. A legal order should be judged not by headline violations but by everyday compliance.
04.01.2026 14:12 — 👍 0 🔁 1 💬 0 📌 0I think this feels particularly shocking because no matter how much you stretch the law this has absolutely no basis of legality whatsoever. No terrorists, no "threat" requiring anticipatory self defence. Nothing.
03.01.2026 09:45 — 👍 249 🔁 79 💬 11 📌 3
#VisitCanada🍁
travel.destinationcanada.com/en-us
"PVV haalt D66 in als grootste partij • Verschil nu 2341 stemmen"
Dat klinkt allemaal erg spannend (en Amerikaans), maar NL is een parlementaire democratie. De partijen die een meerderheid van 75+1 vormen in de Tweede Kamer zijn de winnaars.
nos.nl/liveblog/258...
Grote dag voor Verellen Law: Vanaf deze week huur ik een ruimte in Antwerpen—op een steenworp van het Vlinderpaleis—om cliënten te ontvangen in een comfortabele en gastvrije omgeving.
#Migratierecht
www.verellenlaw.com
“placating the far right by adopting far-right policies does not neutralise extremism: it legitimises it and hollows out the union from within. Instead, Europe must actively champion pluralism, the rule of law, open societies and climate action as sources of strength.”
24.09.2025 05:37 — 👍 5 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0
Ik ben geen vriend van De Wever, maar t.a.v. het VB was de strategie op dat punt de juiste.
Het kan misschien als inspiratiebron dienen voor Nederlandse partijen--misschien in het bijzonder het VVD, die net de omgekeerde strategie heeft gevolgd.
Tijdens de campagne voor de Belgische verkiezingen van vorig jaar heeft de N-VA duidelijk gesteld niet met het Vlaams Belang in zee te zullen gaan.
De peilingen hadden een grote zegen voor VB voorspeld; bleek dat N-VA toch als winnaar uit de bus kwam.
Suggestie van een zuiderbuur aan alle democratische partijen in Nederland: laat je niet meer uit je tent lokken door de groteske uitspraken, en zeg duidelijk aan de kiezers: met die partij regeren we *nooit* meer.
22.09.2025 17:21 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0
Hij zou ook meer dan 2u aan het spreekstoel van de Tweede Kamer hebben gestaan waar hij zou hebben voorgesteld de godsdienstvrijheid af te schaffen om de moslims te treffen?
Onbegrijpelijk dat de man in al z'n waanzin blijkbaar nog steeds serieus genomen wordt door politiek Nederland.
Ben nu ongeveer 30m naar @betrouwbarebronnen.bsky.social aan het luisteren, over de algemene politieke beschouwingen.
Het gaat tot nu toe enkel over Wilders, die blijkbaar weer allerlei uitspraken gedaan heeft die je enkel als waanzinnig kan kwalificeren.
Could you explain who the “outside world” is in your post, and how you think this looks to them? I’m puzzled as the article reads to me like a piece with a humanitarian angle. Is that somehow wrong?
22.09.2025 05:45 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0Ieder kind verdient kwaliteitsvol onderwijs, ook in Brussel. Vlaanderen moet beter kunnen. Wat doet de minister om leerkrachten aan te trekken en, allerbelangrijkst, te houden?
20.09.2025 06:13 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 0 📌 0Onbegrijpelijk dat scholen zoals Balder niet meer ondersteuning krijgen. Iedereen weet dat het lerarentekort dramatisch is. De leerkrachten doen al wat ze kunnen, maar wat doet de Vlaamse overheid, behalve inspecteurs sturen en dreigen met sluiting?
20.09.2025 06:13 — 👍 0 🔁 0 💬 1 📌 0
Gisteren de laatste aflevering van de docu-miniserie over de Brusselse lagere school Balder gekeken.
Onnoemelijk veel respect voor de leerkrachten en andere medewerkers die zich dag in dag uit smijten om de school draaiende te houden in zulke moeilijke omstandigheden.
