The Dresden Administrative Court is hearing two challenges on 11 November 2026 to stationary checks at Germany’s internal borders with Poland and the Czech Republic. The claimants from Saxony and Brandenburg say they were stopped and checked without suspicion at different crossings. They argue that this violates the Schengen Borders Code and the principle of proportionality. The hearing concerns both the formal legal basis for the checks and how they were carried out on the ground.
The federal government extended the temporary checks several times over the course of 2025 and 2026. Operational responsibility lies with the Federal Police. The orders were prompted by security and migration situations, which the Federal Ministry of the Interior cited as justification in each case. The question in dispute is whether the reasons, duration, geographical scope and intensity of the measures meet the strict requirements of European law.
Several courts have recently reviewed individual cases. Administrative courts in Koblenz and Munich ruled in individual decisions that certain identity checks and refusals of entry at internal borders were unlawful. The judgments concerned specific measures and do not have a blanket effect across all border areas, but they have intensified legal scrutiny. In Dresden, the central question is whether the relevant orders were sufficiently justified and whether the forms of checks used respected the requirement to assess each case individually.
The European Commission has highlighted the strict conditions governing checks at internal borders in 2026. In its communications, it stressed that member states must continually document necessity and proportionality, and consider alternative measures that interfere less with people’s rights. The court’s review is based on these principles: the key factors are substantiated information on the period, location, type and intensity of checks, as well as the specific justification given by the authorities.
A ruling by Dresden Administrative Court could provide guidance for other cases beyond the one before it. Any immediate consequences will, however, depend on the terms of the judgment. If the court finds that the law has been breached, appeals may be brought to the Higher Administrative Court and, if necessary, to the Federal Administrative Court . Until the matter is conclusively resolved, the scope and legal requirements of the checks remain disputed. The case has economic and social implications for commuter traffic and cross-border cooperation in the regions along the borders with Poland and the Czech Republic, as well as for the state’s interest in effectively preventing threats.
Editor: Mira Cadena (Article created with AI assistance).