Read on Twitter
Trying to understand whether #EUCO has found a good or a bad compromise is not always easy - esp. when the topic drags on. It depends on expectations, prioritisations & perspectives. An outline of those I have encountered so far - to be complemented. 
/1 https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-budget-plan-lets-hungary-poland-off-the-rule-of-law-hook-for-now/
/1 https://www.politico.eu/article/eu-budget-plan-lets-hungary-poland-off-the-rule-of-law-hook-for-now/
If you want #NextGenerationEU & #MFF to be finally off the table; if you're a Realpolitik person who wants a compromise that works; or you think that the expectations were too high anyway, then the compromise is ok and everyone can live with it. @EU2020DE has done a good job./2
If you're a disappointed RoL defender/activist who has followed the RoL debates for years; if you're worried about the LT ability of the EU to sanction RoL violations: the new delay mechanism is problematic & Council has (once again) watered down the proposal. Not good./3
If you worry about the EU not respecting constitutional identity & think it's a purely national competence to interpret EU law, this compromise is better than the proposal before, but doesn't let you completely off the hook. However, delays are known to be useful in politics./4
If you're an institutional design nerd: The role of the ECJ in this new proposal is problematic, since it would judge first and then the COM would decide on the guidelines. Might be a theoretical perspective, but principles are important too (I would like to think)./5
If you're into semantics, the new proposal does give some leeway to 
&
by mentioning "national identities of MS" and implying discrimination of some countries by repeating "non-discrimination" in two articles. No legal consequences, but still a signaling effect. /6
& by mentioning "national identities of MS" and implying discrimination of some countries by repeating "non-discrimination" in two articles. No legal consequences, but still a signaling effect. /6
As for lawyers, it depends on your specialisation: Some would say "it's good because there are no strong legal changes except the delay, trust the ECJ"; others are not happy with the watering down bc they care abt RoL as such. /7
That's all I can think of for now - If there is a perspective I have forgotten, please add; and an expectations & views I misrepresented, please correct!
