After more than a decade of continuous adjudication on matters pertaining to rule of law violations, Europe’s latest crisis has recently garnered even greater attention due the unexpected ruling in Hann-Invest. Ever since its landmark Portuguese judges judgement, the Court of Justice of the EU has been grappling on how to handle the unexpected consequences of its initial interpretation of Article 19(1) TEU in combination with Article 2 TEU and Article 47 of the Charter. This has, in turn, resulted in an unbalanced response to the entire crisis. However, it appears that a significant shift might soon incur. As will be argued in this thesis, the admissibility ruling on Hann-Invest could present the long-awaited turning point in the way in which the entire crisis is being addressed. Basing my thesis on Monica Claes’ analysis of the origins of these violations, I will explain why Hann-Invest offers a unique opportunity to establish a true “rule of law culture” by its democratisation of the preliminary reference mechanism. While it will ultimately be future case law which will decide if such precedent shall prevail, this judgement could indeed mark the beginning of a new era in European integration, establishing, for the first time, an effective post-accession bottom-up framework able to put an end to any present and future crises of this type. However, to fully comprehend the judgement’s significance, it is important to begin by a step-by-step analysis of socialist law, the transition and accession periods, as well as the current rule of law “toolbox”. This historical perspective is essential to understanding both the context, as well as the root causes of the current crisis. Each phase gives a better understanding of what this possible solution might entail, particularly in light of the latest Hann-Invest judgement.