A look into literature and jurisprudence regarding the dogmatics of Article 23, paragraph 1, sentence 2, and Article 24, paragraph 1 of the Basic Law shows that they have detached themselves from the constitutional text and cannot make sense of the concept of the transfer of sovereign rights: It has been authorized to open the national legal system in such a way that the exclusive claim to sovereignty is retracted and space is given to the direct applicability of a law from another source. This discrepancy between wording and dogmatics was the reason for the investigation. The question posed is whether a robust construction of transfer authorizations can be developed while remaining connected to the constitutional text. In the first part, the author describes how the interpretation and application of Article 24, paragraph 1 of the Basic Law has evolved up to the insertion of Article 23 of the Basic Law, new version; a critique of the prevailing opinion during the Maastricht debate.