Constitutions 6.2 Flashcards
what are 6 things DIFFERENCES which UK and US CONSTITUTIONS have
- checks and balances
- separation of powers
- regional powers
- location of sovereignty
- rights protection
- amendment process
how is ‘separation of powers’ a difference
UK
- Prime minister already has majority of House of Commons = very easy to pass legislation
US
- difficult to obtain congressional approval
what does ‘equal mandate’ mean
equal authority or a clear mandate from the people to act on their priorities (due to them being elected by the people)
what does ‘an invitation to struggle’ mean
the separation of powers creates inevitable clashes between the President and Congress.
how is ‘checks and balances’ a difference
UK
- the executives authority on the branches means that checks and balances are rarely prominent in the UK
US
- very difficult for president to do anything without congressional approval
- congress sometimes agree more with their constituents than with their party leader
how is ‘location of sovereignty’ a difference
UK
- supreme court has a lot less power than US supreme court, due to its uncodefied and unentrenched constitution
how is ‘rights protection’ a difference
UK
- main protection through the HRA 1998
- joined ECHR 1951
US
- constitutionally entrenchment
how is ‘amendment process’ a difference
UK
- parliamentary sovreignity undermines judicial critisms and interpretation, even if their actions are deemed ultra vires
US
- judicial review inhibits the ability to pass legislation
what are the SIMILARITIES of ‘regional powers’ between UK and US government
- powers divided between central and regional governments
- recent attempts to increase regional powers
- how difficult is it to remove regional powers
what are the DIFFERENCES of ‘regional powers’ between UK and US government
- regional powers protected by US, not UK constitution
- varied regional powers in UK, not in US
- more power given to regional powers within US, not as much in the UK
what’s a ‘rational approach’ we could deduce from both the UK’s and US’ constitutions
- US = constitution is vague so would be able to have constitution influenced by own political ideologies if wanted to
- UK = no embedded constitution, they are interpreting and applying laws exactly as written by Parliament.
_________________________________________________________ - US = more chances to elect (HoR, Senate and President) which means more chances to vote rationally for who they believe
- UK = only one MP… that’s it…
what’s a ‘cultural approach’ we could deduce from both the UK’s and US’ constitutions
UK = prime minister can take away devolution, however due to cultural reasons, would be unable to
US = strong ideological cultures within states, and constitution prohibits it
_________________________________________________________
- US and UK constitution are nowhere near the same level when it comes to its authority
_________________________________________________________
- Even though US’ constitution means that it is difficult to overturn amendments = roe vs wade still happened
- David Cameron legalised gay marriage due to cultural belief of equality
what’s a ‘structural approach’ we could deduce from both the UK’s and US’ constitutions
US = congressional majority, difficult for policies to be implemented
UK = needs majority, but because he is already leader of the house with a majority, very easy for new legislation to pass
_________________________________________________________
US = congress is more powerful than House of Commons when it comes to ratifying treaties and appointments
- HOWEVER both obtain checks and balances nonetheless
how is ‘location of sovereignty’ a difference and a similarity
DIFFERENCE
- ultra vires and judicial review
SIMILARITY
- judicial independence and branch nonetheless
