For EU to take action against Hungary you need all other members to agree. Unfortunately Poland and Hungary are backing each other up and veto any action against the other.
This was obviously a huge bone of contention during the recent talks. A compromise was reached and, interestingly, both sides declared victory. The actual agreement contains wording which is vague on this issue.
We'll see how it plays out. I believe this can be implemented and that Poland and Hungary alone cannot block this. Which I think is good - I don't want EU to finance an autocratic government in my country (Poland).
More on this: https://www.politico.eu/article/what-eu-leaders-really-decid...
Is that not authoritarian?
Why is it for Europeans outside of Hungary, or even international citizens living in the US to define how Hungary should operate? Is it not for the people and leaders of Hungary to do so?
Is it not more in line with self determination to not get all bent out of shape when a nation does not conduct its affairs in line with your foreign sensibilities?
It certainly would not be democratic to have a supranational body override the will of the Hungarian people but I think there's a couple of points missing here: 1. does Index being disrupted by its owners in such a way that the editorial board and 70 staff members resign in protest really reflect 'the will of the people'? 2. EU does not have the right to dictate to Hungary what to do but it does have the right to take its ball and go home. If Hungary's values are not in line with the values of the EU, the latter has every right (and duty) to invite them to leave the union and forgo the benefits of membership that Hungary currently enjoys.
So I agree you're right about "let's force Hungary not to do this" to be something of an authoritarian knee-jerk reaction, but EU membership is a two-way street: you get and you give, so not all requests to "give" or "conform to EU values" are authoritarianism, that's just a part of belonging to a collective.
A subset of the EU needs to go federal, with the remainder staying in a toned down version of the EU.
Do you think the national governments are more connected to the local population? I'm sure the Polish and Hungarian population think that
"Boo EU bad" has become a meme already. Yawn
The UK is the extreme example of this: for a decade, their EP contingent has had a massive number of euroskeptic politicians who never managed to win more than a single seat in the British Parliament. Brexit proved that Strasbourg was actually more representative than Westminster.
The definition of federal: "Of or constituting a form of government in which power is distributed between a central authority and a number of constituent territorial units"
OP is suggesting a more decentralized EU, not a "bigger leviathan"