What Threatens Germany’s Basic Law and How to Protect It

The 2025 failed bid of Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf to join the Federal Constitutional Court as a judge has sparked a debate about political campaigns, judicial independence, and how scientific expertise is treated. The jurist proposed by the SPD withdrew her candidacy after it became clear that there wasn’t enough support within CDU and CSU factions.

In her book “Wahl und Wahrheit,” Brosius-Gersdorf works through the experiences surrounding her candidacy. She describes how quickly a personnel decision can become the subject of populist sharpening, and she warns about the consequences for the judiciary, science, and democratic institutions.

Plea for a factual, sober culture of debate

From a constitutional-law perspective, Brosius-Gersdorf addresses several socio-political conflicts. These include the legal regulation of abortion, potential bans on political parties, surrogacy, and the relationship between state and church.

Furthermore, she questions the reform needs in the election of constitutional judges and the responsibility of the media. The protection of scientists and women from targeted attacks, as well as the prerequisites for a fact-based debate culture, are also covered.

Brosius-Gersdorf ties her personal experiences to her scholarly work. Her central thesis is that a resilient democracy rests on verifiable facts, independent institutions, and the serious exchange of arguments.

“Wahl und Wahrheit: Was unser Grundgesetz gefährdet und wie wir es schützen” is now published by Droemer HC as a 352-page hardcover for 24 euros, as well as an e-book and audiobook. A reading sample is available on the publisher’s site.
The author, Prof. Dr. Frauke Brosius-Gersdorf, is a professor of public law at the University of Potsdam. Her research interests include constitutional law, social law, and education law. (dd/pm)