The economic turmoil engendered by the collapse of the subprime mortgage market in the US turned into a sovereign debt crisis in the Eurozone in 2010. The debt crisis has put an end to the time of permissive consensus. Euroscepticism has transitioned into mainstream politics within the EU Member States as the public have become more skeptical towards the European project. In the meantime, EU leaders have empowered the EU's competences. The EU began to intervene in national budgetary policies and established a permanent stability mechanism for the euro area. This study examines how different European political groups in the European Parliament responded to the EU's crisis management measures while drawing on the speeches of MEPs from EPP, S&D, ECR, EFD and GUE/NGL. By doing so, it delves into the impacts of the crisis on EU politics, particularly the lines of conflict in the Parliament, and, in what ways, European solidarity was conceptualized by different political groups in the Parliament. The study shows that, amid the crisis, the pro-/anti-EU dimension has become more substantial in political contestation which is in line with the rise of Euroscepticism. It also identifies the center-periphery dimension through which the structural asymmetries of the Eurozone were contested and different standpoints within political groups can be understood. Lastly, it reveals the importance of a multidimensional approach to the concepts of European solidarity employed by different political groups.The economic turmoil engendered by the collapse of the subprime mortgage market in the US turned into a sovereign debt crisis in the Eurozone in 2010. The debt crisis has put an end to the time of permissive consensus. Euroscepticism has transitioned into mainstream politics within the EU Member States as the public have become more skeptical towards the European project. In the meantime, EU leaders have empowered the EU's competences. The EU began to intervene in national budgetary policies and established a permanent stability mechanism for the euro area. This study examines how different European political groups in the European Parliament responded to the EU's crisis management measures while drawing on the speeches of MEPs from EPP, S&D, ECR, EFD and GUE/NGL. By doing so, it delves into the impacts of the crisis on EU politics, particularly the lines of conflict in the Parliament, and, in what ways, European solidarity was conceptualized by different political groups in the Parliament. The study shows that, amid the crisis, the pro-/anti-EU dimension has become more substantial in political contestation which is in line with the rise of Euroscepticism. It also identifies the center-periphery dimension through which the structural asymmetries of the Eurozone were contested and different standpoints within political groups can be understood. Lastly, it reveals the importance of a multidimensional approach to the concepts of European solidarity employed by different political groups.