The former Federal Constitutional Court judge, Peter Huber, suggested that the Federal Constitutional Court might rule on banning specific state sections or other subdivisions of the AfD party. According to the legal scholar, if a party does not operate as a monolithically anti-constitutional entity, the state should limit its action only to those sections where such actions are occurring. He proposed that a partial ban would be the lesser means to neutralize the risks the party poses to the liberal-democratic basic constitutional order. Notably, he pointed to the Thuringian AfD chapter led by Björn Höcke as a primary example.
Huber explained that the central question the court would need to address is whether only parts of the party have crossed the constitutional red lines, while the remainder operates within a legitimate political spectrum. He added that this approach would also help combat excesses and give the rest of the party a chance to stabilize itself within the framework of the constitution. Huber, who previously served as a CDU/CSU politician and Minister of the Interior in Thuringia before joining the Federal Constitutional Court, articulated these views.
Under Article 21 of the Basic Law, political parties are deemed unconstitutional if their aims or the behavior of their members are intended to undermine or abolish the free democratic basic order, or threaten the existence of the Federal Republic of Germany. The Federal Constitutional Court is the authority responsible for deciding on the constitutionality of such parties. However, the court cannot initiate action on its own; an official review mandate must first be provided by the Bundestag, the Bundesrat, or the Federal Government.
