Google lies to deceive about the EU’s immigration policy.

2 November 2026, by Eric Zuesse. (All of my recent articles can be seen here.)

My article yesterday, “No EU nation has a right to determine whom to allow into the country”, DOCUMENTED that the official policy of the EU is that whenever EU policy regarding immigration contradicts an EU member-nation’s policy on immigration, the member-nation’s policy is null and void — NOT law — that in regards to immigration, the EU is the ultimate authority and power, throughout the EU.

Among the EU’s legal provisions that were referred to and linked to there were (besides several others) the following from the “CONSOLIDATED VERSION OF THE TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE EUROPEAN UNION”:

——

https://eur-lex.europa.eu/eli/treaty/tfeu_2016/oj/eng

https://archive.is/If6tx

https://archive.is/If6tx#selection-11929.0-11993.150

TITLE I

CATEGORIES AND AREAS OF UNION COMPETENCE

Article 2

1.   When the Treaties confer on the Union exclusive competence in a specific area, only the Union may legislate and adopt legally binding acts, the Member States being able to do so themselves only if so empowered by the Union or for the implementation of Union acts.

2.   When the Treaties confer on the Union a competence shared with the Member States in a specific area, the Union and the Member States may legislate and adopt legally binding acts in that area. The Member States shall exercise their competence to the extent that the Union has not exercised its competence. The Member States shall again exercise their competence to the extent that the Union has decided to cease exercising its competence.

3.   The Member States shall coordinate their economic and employment policies within arrangements as determined by this Treaty, which the Union shall have competence to provide.

4.   The Union shall have competence, in accordance with the provisions of the Treaty on European Union, to define and implement a common foreign and security policy, including the progressive framing of a common defence policy.

5.   In certain areas and under the conditions laid down in the Treaties, the Union shall have competence to carry out actions to support, coordinate or supplement the actions of the Member States, without thereby superseding their competence in these areas.

Legally binding acts of the Union adopted on the basis of the provisions of the Treaties relating to these areas shall not entail harmonisation of Member States’ laws or regulations.

6.   The scope of and arrangements for exercising the Union’s competences shall be determined by the provisions of the Treaties relating to each area.

https://archive.is/If6tx#selection-16897.0-17752.0

CHAPTER 2

POLICIES ON BORDER CHECKS, ASYLUM AND IMMIGRATION

CONSOLIDATED VERSION OF THE TREATY ON THE FUNCTIONING OF THE EUROPEAN UNION

Article 77

(ex Article 62 TEC)

1.   The Union shall develop a policy with a view to:

(a)

ensuring the absence of any controls on persons, whatever their nationality, when crossing internal borders;

(b)

carrying out checks on persons and efficient monitoring of the crossing of external borders;

(c)

the gradual introduction of an integrated management system for external borders.

2.   For the purposes of paragraph 1, the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, shall adopt measures concerning:

(a)

the common policy on visas and other short-stay residence permits;

(b)

the checks to which persons crossing external borders are subject;

(c)

the conditions under which nationals of third countries shall have the freedom to travel within the Union for a short period;

(d)

any measure necessary for the gradual establishment of an integrated management system for external borders;

(e)

the absence of any controls on persons, whatever their nationality, when crossing internal borders.

3.   If action by the Union should prove necessary to facilitate the exercise of the right referred to in Article 20(2)(a), and if the Treaties have not provided the necessary powers, the Council, acting in accordance with a special legislative procedure, may adopt provisions concerning passports, identity cards, residence permits or any other such document. The Council shall act unanimously after consulting the European Parliament.

4.   This Article shall not affect the competence of the Member States concerning the geographical demarcation of their borders, in accordance with international law.

Article 78

(ex Articles 63, points 1 and 2, and 64(2) TEC)

1.   The Union shall develop a common policy on asylum, subsidiary protection and temporary protection with a view to offering appropriate status to any third-country national requiring international protection and ensuring compliance with the principle of non-refoulement. This policy must be in accordance with the Geneva Convention of 28 July 1951 and the Protocol of 31 January 1967 relating to the status of refugees, and other relevant treaties.

2.   For the purposes of paragraph 1, the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, shall adopt measures for a common European asylum system comprising:

(a)

a uniform status of asylum for nationals of third countries, valid throughout the Union;

(b)

a uniform status of subsidiary protection for nationals of third countries who, without obtaining European asylum, are in need of international protection;

(c)

a common system of temporary protection for displaced persons in the event of a massive inflow;

(d)

common procedures for the granting and withdrawing of uniform asylum or subsidiary protection status;

(e)

criteria and mechanisms for determining which Member State is responsible for considering an application for asylum or subsidiary protection;

(f)

standards concerning the conditions for the reception of applicants for asylum or subsidiary protection;

(g)

partnership and cooperation with third countries for the purpose of managing inflows of people applying for asylum or subsidiary or temporary protection.

3.   In the event of one or more Member States being confronted by an emergency situation characterised by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries, the Council, on a proposal from the Commission, may adopt provisional measures for the benefit of the Member State(s) concerned. It shall act after consulting the European Parliament.

Article 79

(ex Article 63, points 3 and 4, TEC)

1.   The Union shall develop a common immigration policy aimed at ensuring, at all stages, the efficient management of migration flows, fair treatment of third-country nationals residing legally in Member States, and the prevention of, and enhanced measures to combat, illegal immigration and trafficking in human beings.

2.   For the purposes of paragraph 1, the European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, shall adopt measures in the following areas:

(a)

the conditions of entry and residence, and standards on the issue by Member States of long-term visas and residence permits, including those for the purpose of family reunification;

(b)

the definition of the rights of third-country nationals residing legally in a Member State, including the conditions governing freedom of movement and of residence in other Member States;

(c)

illegal immigration and unauthorised residence, including removal and repatriation of persons residing without authorisation;

(d)

combating trafficking in persons, in particular women and children.

3.   The Union may conclude agreements with third countries for the readmission to their countries of origin or provenance of third-country nationals who do not or who no longer fulfil the conditions for entry, presence or residence in the territory of one of the Member States.

4.   The European Parliament and the Council, acting in accordance with the ordinary legislative procedure, may establish measures to provide incentives and support for the action of Member States with a view to promoting the integration of third-country nationals residing legally in their territories, excluding any harmonisation of the laws and regulations of the Member States.

5.   This Article shall not affect the right of Member States to determine volumes of admission of third-country nationals coming from third countries to their territory in order to seek work, whether employed or self-employed.

Article 80

The policies of the Union set out in this Chapter and their implementation shall be governed by the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, including its financial implications, between the Member States. Whenever necessary, the Union acts adopted pursuant to this Chapter shall contain appropriate measures to give effect to this principle.

——

This morning (November 2nd), however, I Googled my article’s headline “No EU nation has a right to determine whom to allow into the country.”, and atop the finds was this GoogleAI article alleging that I had misrepresented:

AI Overview

Under European Union law, immigration and border control are shared competencies between the EU and its member states, meaning the claim that individual EU nations have no right to determine entry is legally inaccurate. [1, 2, 3, 4]

Key Legal Realities

• Shared Competence: According to the European Parliament Fact Sheets on Immigration Policy, the EU develops common rules regarding the entry and legal residence of non-EU nationals, as outlined in Article 79 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). [1, 2] [GoogleAI’s reference there numbered 1 is headlined “EU competences in the field of immigration policy”

and it directly contradicts what GoogleAI alleges to be said there — Google says that this is a “Shared Competence” instead of an “EU competence.”]

• National Quotas and Work Admission: Under Article 79(5) TFEU, member states explicitly retain the sovereign right to determine the volume of admission for non-EU nationals coming to their territories to seek employment (whether employed or self-employed). [1, 2] [That statement is accurate.]
• National Security and Border Management: Member states retain primary responsibility for maintaining public order and safeguarding national security, and practical border operations involve significant national administration alongside EU frameworks. [1] [That misrepresents what the linked-to document says.]
• Political Debates: The quote reflects commentary or political arguments (such as ongoing debates in Poland between leaders like Donald Tusk and Karol Nawrocki regarding national vs. EU jurisdiction) rather than a complete description of EU treaty law. [1] [My article relates Poland’s Tusk-v.-Nawrocki debate to the actual EU laws.]

On Saturday, October 31st, Prime Minister Tusk stuck by his position that the Polish court which had refused to affirm the EU’s authority over this matter “was not a genuine court”: he said “Let’s call things for what they are: for years, there have been organisations and politicians in Poland who seek to destroy democracy and the rule of law. It is no coincidence they find support among pro-Russian forces globally.” He was alleging that that court represented “pro-Russian forces” instead of the Polish people. Al Jazeera on October 31st had a good article about this conflict, “Protests outside Poland’s constitutional court: What’s the crisis about?”. Tusk’s argument was that the issue here was whether Poland’s policy on immigration should be decided by the EU, a “democracy,” or instead by “pro-Russian forces.” Polish President Nawrocki’s position is instead that it should be determined by the Polish people:

There is no European demos; its existence cannot be decreed or codified, and without a demos, there is no democracy. In the Polish vision of the EU, the only sovereigns remain nation–states – demos understood as communities of citizens of individual EU member states. Modern nations are not tribes torn by atavistic passions for domination over others – as the EU mainstream tries to portray them – but nations with millennia–old traditions, culture, and interests. Attempting to eliminate them – as European centralists would have it – will only lead to conflict and misfortune. Considering the existence of nations and their sovereign states as an evil that must be overcome is another form of a utopian program.

But, then, in the same breath he alleges: “Let me be crystal clear: I am a supporter of Poland in the European Union.” He thus chooses to nullify himself, rather than to be honest about his position’s logical incompatibility with the EU.

If both sides in a political debate are merely two sides of a dictatorship, then that still is no democracy. Calling it a “democracy” doesn’t make it one; it just hides the lies. The truth isn’t even being offered as an option.

—————

Investigative historian Eric Zuesse’s latest book, AMERICA’S EMPIRE OF EVIL: Hitler’s Posthumous Victory, and Why the Social Sciences Need to Change, is about how America took over the world after World War II in order to enslave it to U.S.-and-allied billionaires. Their cartels extract the world’s wealth by control of not only their ‘news’ media but the social ‘sciences’ — duping the public.