Friedrich Merz left the press conference on 7 September without addressing whether the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) should be outlawed after its victory in Saxony‑Anhalt. Instead, he reaffirmed a reform agenda that includes tax cuts for high earners, reductions in welfare spending and a hard‑line migration stance, policies that have struggled to win popular support.

Merz also drew a controversial parallel between the AfD and Die Linke, a left‑wing party he dislikes. While Die Linke has not been forced to dissolve its youth wing after extremist statements, the AfD has faced multiple legal actions, including a €13,000 fine for a speech that echoed Nazi SA slogans.

Wüst pushes for a ban review

In a surprising shift, Hendrik Wüst, minister‑president of North Rhine‑Westphalia and a potential successor to Merz, urged the federal government to launch a serious examination of a ban on the AfD. Wüst, who governs in coalition with the Greens and enjoys high approval ratings, said a specialised working group should assess the party's compatibility with Germany's democratic order.

The call marks the first time a senior CDU figure has publicly entertained the idea. Until now, the party's leadership has largely stayed silent, preferring to focus on economic reforms rather than confronting the far‑right's electoral gains.

Legal and political context

Germany's constitution allows a ban only through the Federal Constitutional Court in Karlsruhe, requiring a two‑thirds majority of the Second Senate's eight judges. The legal threshold is high, and past attempts to outlaw extremist parties have been rare.

Earlier this year, the Society for Civil Rights (GFF) released a 1,675‑page legal opinion, accompanied by 1,400 pages of documentation, alleging that the AfD repeatedly breaches democratic principles. The report has been cited by several left‑leaning politicians who have long advocated for a ban.

In August, Cem Özdemir, Green minister‑president of Baden‑Württemberg, and Defence Minister Boris Pistorius (SPD) called for prohibiting the AfD's nationalist wing. Their statements added weight to the growing chorus demanding action.

However, not all experts agree. Political scientist Wolfgang Merkel, speaking alongside SPD politician Carmen Wegge, warned that a ban could constitute a "gross violation of popular sovereignty" and risk severe political fallout if the move fails.

Security concerns and public opinion

Domestic intelligence officials have long flagged the AfD as a threat. Stephan Kramer, the Jewish head of Thuringia's domestic intelligence agency and a coordinator for the federal services, has repeatedly urged a ban, most recently on a national radio programme.

Critics fear that a ban could backfire, pushing supporters into underground networks. Musician Jan Gorkow warned in August that some AfD adherents might invoke a "Day X", far‑right jargon for a collapse of constitutional order, if the party is outlawed.

Holocaust survivor Charlotte Knobloch, former president of the Central Council of Jews in Germany, told Stern that "perhaps it's still worth a try." At 93, she argued that the AfD's rhetoric in many respects mirrors that of the Nazi Party before it seized power.

What a ban would mean for workers and households

For ordinary Germans, the debate is not abstract. If the AfD were prohibited, its elected representatives would lose parliamentary immunity, potentially altering the balance of power in state legislatures. That could affect policy discussions on wages, social benefits and climate measures, areas where the AfD has consistently opposed progressive reforms.

Trade unions have expressed cautious optimism. The German Trade Union Confederation (DGB) noted that a ban could reduce the platform for xenophobic and anti‑labour rhetoric, but warned that any legal action must be transparent to avoid fueling claims of political persecution.

Consumer groups also watch the issue closely. The AfD's stance on energy policy, advocating for rapid coal expansion and opposing EU climate targets, clashes with the interests of households facing rising utility bills. A ban might limit the spread of such positions, but could also polarise voters who feel their views are being silenced.

Political calculations within the CDU

The internal dynamics of the CDU are crucial. While Merz continues to champion his economic programme, Wüst's call for a review suggests a possible shift in the party's strategy. An INSA ranking published after the Saxony‑Anhalt vote placed Wüst third among 20 politicians, while Merz fell to the bottom, indicating a loss of influence for the chancellor‑candidate.

Analysts note that if Wüst were to become chancellor, a ban might become a realistic policy option. Until then, the CDU remains divided between those who see the AfD as a political competitor to be outflanked and those who view it as a security threat demanding decisive action.

Next steps

Wüst has stopped short of endorsing an immediate ban, cautioning against "hasty decisions." He proposes an expert working group to examine the legal basis and potential consequences of outlawing the AfD. The group's findings could be presented to the Federal Constitutional Court, which would then decide whether the case meets the stringent criteria for a ban.

Meanwhile, the AfD is preparing to take its first steps in Saxony‑Anhalt, with journalists likely to be among its early targets. The party's newfound regional power raises questions about media freedom and the safety of reporters covering far‑right activities.

As the debate unfolds, the balance between protecting democratic institutions and preserving political pluralism will be tested. The outcome could set a precedent for how Europe deals with parties that straddle the line between legitimate dissent and extremist ideology.