evidence: The Court of Justice of the EU has been active in recent years in protecting Article 2 TEU values more broadly. This has included the development of a principle of "non-regression" from commitments entered into upon accession for Member States. Do you think that such a principle would prevent a Member State constitutional or apex court from issuing a judgment such as the U.S. Supreme Court’s upcoming judgment, if were to remove fundamental rights of individuals? [...] I concur with their argument. The Court of Justice of the EU’s jurisprudence since the Portuguese Judges ruling is crucial for protecting fundamental rights and the Rule of Law in the EU. I would also argue that the incremental incorporation of the rights found in the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights displays a process of incorporation in the EU. For example, in the SEGRO ruling in 2018, the European Court of Justice protected the right to property of EU citizens in the Member States. [...] However, leaving interpretative theories aside, I think the Court of Justice of the EU’s shift toward a European constitutional identity is vital as it could be crucial for solving the Rule of Law backsliding in the Member States.