Atomic Weapons Referenda Case I

8 BVerfGE 104 (1959)

Study Aids
Case Briefs Overview
Casebooks
Case Briefs
A
From our private database of 46,300+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Atomic Weapons Referenda Case I

Federal Republic of Germany Federal Constitutional Court
8 BVerfGE 104 (1959)

Facts

In the 1950s, the government of the Christian Democratic Union led by Chancellor Konrad Adenauer sought to equip the German military with tactical nuclear weapons. The opposition party, the Social Democrats, controlled certain city-level governments and opposed the plan for nuclear armament. To demonstrate the public opposition to nuclear armament, these governments led by the Social Democrats planned to hold referenda on the issue. The Adenauer government objected to these referenda, arguing the referenda were unconstitutional. The Adenauer government argued that because referenda concerned military affairs, the referenda infringed upon the power of the federal government. The Federal Constitutional Court considered the constitutionality of the referenda in Hamburg and Bremen specifically.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 815,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

    Unlock this case briefRead our student testimonials

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

    Learn about our approachRead more about Quimbee

Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,300 briefs, keyed to 988 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 815,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,300 briefs - keyed to 988 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership

Casebooks

Constitutional Law

Key Terms