Expert opinion: AfD's proposals on immigration in Saxony-Anhalt are not legally possible

The political landscape in Germany is approaching a turning point, one that is particularly unsettling for highly qualified immigrants and international talent. In Saxony-Anhalt, the AfD is leading the polls for the state elections by a significant margin and has already presented a confident "government program." But what would the participation of a party that openly promotes a "culture of deportation" mean for the rule of law and the urgently needed influx of skilled workers ? A recent legal opinion published on the Verfassungsblog (Constitutional Law Blog) has dissected the AfD's migration policy proposals and reached a sobering conclusion: A large portion of their demands are simply illegal and serve more to pacify voters than to promote serious policy.

Exceeding one's competence as a program

As a law firm, we are observing with concern how the boundaries of legal jurisdiction are being deliberately blurred in the current debate . The expert opinion clarifies that of the AfD's 56 demands, 21 are already invalid because they can only be decided at the federal or European level . A state government simply does not have the authority to abolish subsidiary protection status or to curtail the fundamental right to asylum. This creates a distorted picture of the legal situation for well-educated immigrants , suggesting that a federal state can operate in isolation from the rest of the country and applicable EU law. This form of disinformation is extremely damaging to Germany as a business location, as it sows uncertainty among every potential skilled worker considering building their professional future in eastern Germany.

The illusion of an immigration emergency

A central argument of the AfD is the claim of an "institutional collapse" to justify so-called immigration bans. However, no such emergency clause exists in German law. According to Section 44 Paragraph 1 of the Asylum Act, a state government is obligated to accept and distribute asylum seekers. The demand to categorically deny admission to people with unclear identities or from safe third countries also lacks any legal basis. We see this as a dangerous attack on the rule of law principle enshrined in Article 20 Paragraph 3 of the Basic Law , which strictly binds the executive branch to law and justice. Such populist demands ignore the fact that Germany, in the global competition for talent, depends on clear, reliable structures, not arbitrary admission freezes.

Repression instead of integration

The plans are particularly drastic in the areas of social benefits and accommodation. The AfD is demanding mandatory work across the board for a wage of just 80 cents per hour – a proposal that has already been repeatedly ruled unconstitutional by the courts. The planned confiscation of assets is also legally obsolete, as stricter rules already apply to offsetting assets than those for German social welfare recipients. From the perspective of the academics and professionals we represent, this rhetoric of deterrence is counterproductive. A modern migration administration should focus on digitalization and efficiency , instead of investing resources in legally untenable repressive measures. The tendency toward a "culture of deportation" described in the report is the antithesis of what a country facing demographic change needs.

The “deportation offensive” and European law

The centerpiece of the AfD's platform is deportations, for which a "task force" modeled on the US ICE (Immigration and Customs Enforcement) is to be created. However, the planned 300 detention places for deportees and the use of regular prisons directly contradict Article 16 of the EU Returns Directive , which mandates a strict separation of criminal and deportation detention. The idea of independently concluding bilateral repatriation agreements with other countries also fails due to the Lindau Agreement, which reserves such powers for the federal government. It is a deliberate attempt to deceive voters to promise measures that are doomed to failure under international and constitutional law. Instead of promoting skilled worker immigration through bureaucratic simplification, an expensive apparatus of exclusion is being outlined, which is projected to cost the state of Saxony-Anhalt alone around 100 million euros.

Conclusion

The legal opinion published by Verfassungsblog exposes large parts of the AfD's "government program" as a legal fiction. Implementing its demands would massively violate the German Basic Law and EU law. This policy is extremely dangerous for Germany's economic development and reputation. We don't need a "culture of rejection," but rather legally sound pathways for every qualified professional who wants to come to Germany. A policy based on exclusion and lawbreaking drives away precisely the people we urgently need to solve the skilled worker shortage.

Here is the link to the expert opinion on the Verfassungsblog: https://verfassungsblog.de/afd-migration-parteitag/