Chapter 1 The United States of America
Restricted access

In Chapter 1 (‘A comparativist critique of US judicial review of fundamental rights cases: exceptionalisms, paradoxes and contradictions’), Rosenfeld offers a critical account of US rights-based constitutional adjudication by emphasizing its exceptional features as well as its paradoxes. US exceptionalism resides in several reasons, namely the Supreme Court’s unique challenge posed by the need to interpret an eighteenth century bill of rights for a contemporary society, the controversy over originalism, the tendency to convert all important divisive political issues into constitutional ones, and the enormous powers of the Supreme Court in shaping fundamental rights aided by the extreme rigidity of the Constitution’s amendment provisions. In terms of paradoxes, one is ‘the politicization of constitutional law as an inextricable consequence of the systematic constitutionalization of divisive political issues’ such as abortion, assisted suicide, gay marriage, etc. Rosenfeld illustrates these traits with some of the most significant rulings of the Supreme Court including in the recent cases on same sex marriage in Hollingsworthy v Perry and United States v Windsor. He argues that these features render the comparison with other constitutional or highest courts in most common law and civil law countries barely relevant. However, he also suggests that the US example may yield some worthy comparative insights if issues are approached at a higher level of abstraction.

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

Access options

Get access to the full article by using one of the access options below.

Other access options

Redeem Token

Institutional Login

Log in with Open Athens, Shibboleth, or your institutional credentials

Login via Institutional Access

Personal login

Log in with your Elgar Online account

Login with you Elgar account
Monograph Book