| How are the UK and US constitutions different in terms of Codification? | -Britain: Uncodified, so it very Flexible
-America: Codified, so it Difficult to Amend |
| How are the UK and US constitutions different in terms of Sources | -Britain: The UKCON is from a Range of Sources, alongside Statue Law, Common Law, and Works of Authority
-America: The Main Source is the Actual Document itself. The 27 Amendments and the SCOTUS Interpretive Amendments makes a Part of the USCON too |
| How are the UK and US constitutions different in terms of Powers? | -Britain: Fused Powers allow the Government to Dominate the Parliament. This can lead to an Elective Dictatorship
-America: Separation of Powers allows one Branch to be Dominant by Dividing powers. Can lead to Gridlock |
| How are the UK and US constitutions different in terms of Checks and Balances | -Britain: C+B is limiting, as the UKSC, though more Active in challenging the UK Government, power still Rests with the Government
-America: C+B is clear, as the power of Each Branch prevents the other branches from becoming too Powerful. Again, it can lead to a Gridlock, or Loopholes developing. |
| How are the UK and US constitutions different in terms of Sovereignty | -Britain: Parliament has all Sovereignty, in theory. The Parliament and Government therefore have Considerable Power
-America: Resides in the Document which dishes them to Federal and State Governments. The Supreme Court also has some Sovereignty as it can Interpret the USCON. |
| What Similar Impacts do the UKCON and USCON have? | -Each can create a Limited Government as well as Governments that seem to have No Checks on them. It depends on the National Circumstance
-Both attempt to Create a Powerful Central Government which is Supreme to the Countries or States in the Union/Kingdom
-Both led to a 2 Party System Essentially, less so in Britain
-Both have Elements not keeping up with Liberal and Representative Democracies
-Both make sure the Citizen's Rights and Protected and Judiciable. |
| What are the Different Impacts that the UKCON and USCON have? | -US Politics in the 21st Century has encouraged Hyper-Partisanship, but the Constitution encourages Bipartisanship. The UK Government though can get a Majority which means it doesn't need to work with the Other Parties
-Rights in the US are better Protected as the USCON is Sovereign. SCOTUS however can Politicise them. In Britain, a new statute law can Remove the Rights, but an Independent Judiciary can Challenge the Government better.
The nature of Devolution in the UK has given Third Parties a chance to Succeed at the Local Level: Lib Dems in the Council Elections. But in the USA, even at the Local Level, the Republicans and Democrats are usually Dominate.
-Some of the Undemocratic Elements of the UKCON is being Reformed, while the USCON such as the Electoral College still Remains and probably will not change Ever |
| What is the Key Difference between British Devolution and American Federalism? | -In America, Federalism makes power Flow UP from the States to the Federal Government
-In Britain, Devolution makes power flow DOWN from the Central Government to Devolved Bodies which exist because of the Central Government |
| What is the Similarities between British Devolution and American Federalism | -There are Regional Differences in both Britain (Tuition Fees) and USA (Marijuana)
-Central Government has Authority on Policy Areas of National Interest, such as the Ability to Declare War
-Central and Regional Governments have Disagreed. Scotland recently with the Transgender Bill and Abortion Rights after the SCOTUS ruling
-Law from Central Government is usually Superior to Regional Laws/ |
| What is the Differences between British Devolution and American Federalism? | -In the US, the States have Sovereignty by the USCON which Guarantees their Powers. In Britain, the Devolved Parliaments exist as a result of a Parliamentary Statute, which can be revoked at any time
-The Judicial Nature of the USCON allows States to challenge the Federal Government. In Britain, this is also possible, though, the Lack of Sovereignty of the UKSC can make their rulings ignored.
-Powers of the Devolved Bodies are not Equally Shared. Each Body has its powers. But in the States, they are all Equal and Powerful. |
| What is
1. Rational theory
2. Cultural theory
3. Structural theory | 1. Rational theory: Outcomes are explained because Individuals are acting Selfish
2. Cultural Theory: Outcomes are explained because People are acting because of a Shared Belief or Ideology
3. Structural Theory: Outcomes are explained because of the Institutions and Systems of Governments |
| Explain why Most of the Differences between the UKCON and USCON is best seen via Structural theory? | -Most Differences exist because of the Systems and Processes in each Constitution i.e. the Amendment Process, Allocation of Power
-These Processes in turn outline how Power is Distributed and Used. For Example, the Extent of Checks and Balances differs because of the Nature and Location of the Constitution |
| Explain how a Cultural Theory can also apply when Comparing the UKCON and the USCON | -The UKCON has a Long, Evolving History, but the USCON was made more quickly because of the Circumstances involved
-The 'Shared Beliefs' of those Respective Nations are Evident in their Constitutions, because of the Historical Experience. Scottish Nationalism led to the Independence Referendum of 2014; the U.S. states yearned for Autonomy from a Tyrannical British Empire.
-This can be why the Differences in Branches exist in the UK and USA. In Britain, the Fused Powers are largely Accepted, whereas, in the USA, a Limited Government prevails. |
| Explain why the Rational theory may be not as useful when comparing the UKCON and USCON | -There is not a lot of Individuals to act Selfishly when Considering Constitution
-But it could be applied when considering Differences in Federalism and Devolution, as well as Separation of Powers vs Fusion of Powers
-For Example, Congressional People may care more for their Constituents, whereas in the UK, MPs care more for their own Party |
