Increasing socio-spatial inequalities in Europe have led to a revival of the term "peripheralization" in urban and regional research. In this context, peripheralization is often seen as an outcome of powerlessness. It is stated that peripheralized actors are lacking the capacities to influence decisions or are excluded from decision-making networks. This paper contributes to the understanding of the relationship between peripheralization and power by empirically testing if the notion of "powerless" peripheries holds true in the light of established theories on local power. Therefore, we refer to the Community Power Debate, especially to concepts known as the "three faces of power" and the distinction between "power over" and "power to", which were brought forward by Urban Regime theories. We discuss two empirical cases in Saxony-Anhalt, Germany, and demonstrate that peripheralization here cannot be regarded as the outcome of an intended disadvantage facilitated by powerful elites ("power over"). Rather, we highlight a number of structural constraints, which decisively limit the capacity to act and the scope for local decision-making ("power to"). We conclude that future research should overcome a perspective on peripheries as exclusively being dominated and disadvantaged by the centres and focus on the lack of resources that hinders peripheries to have a more sustained influence in political decision-making.