American Vs British Constitutions: A Comparative Glimpse

The constitutions of the United States and the United Kingdom differ in several ways, including their historical origins and democratic practices. The UK constitution, originating in the medieval period, emphasizes parliamentary sovereignty and representative democracy, with British citizens being 'subjects of the Crown'. In contrast, the US Constitution, which began with a revolution, provides Americans with greater participation in electoral processes and emphasizes popular sovereignty. The UK's unwritten constitution allows for easier law amendments, while the US Constitution's written nature makes courts powerful institutions for interpreting and enforcing laws, limiting legislative power. These differences reflect varying approaches to individual rights and liberties in each country.

Explore related products

The English Constitution: Parliament and the British monarchy, and the contrasts between British and American government

$12.38

The Constitution of the United States of America: The Declaration of Independence, The Bill of Rights

$9.99 $9.99

Democracy’s Privileged Few: Legislative Privilege and Democratic Norms in the British and American Constitutions

$55.44 $60

The Constitution of the United States of America: The Declaration of Independence, The Bill of Rights

$19.99 $3.89

Conservatives and the Constitution: Imagining Constitutional Restoration in the Heyday of American Liberalism (Cambridge Studies on the American Constitution)

$34.99 $41

A Defence of the Constitutions of Government of the United States of America: Volume I

$17.95 $17.95

Democracy and sovereignty

The UK has an uncodified constitution, emphasising representative democracy and parliamentary sovereignty. British citizens are technically ''subjects of the Crown' and have fewer opportunities for democratic participation compared to Americans. The US Constitution grants its citizens a more extensive role in the nation's electoral processes. For instance, between the 1780s and 1880s, the US House of Representatives was elected based on a much broader franchise than the UK House of Commons. The US Senate has been directly elected since 1914, while the UK's upper house, the House of Lords, remains unelected.

The UK's unwritten constitution provides flexibility to its Parliament, allowing laws to be changed or amended with relative ease. In contrast, the US Constitution is more challenging to amend due to its written and codified nature. This rigidity has resulted in the courts playing a powerful role in interpreting and upholding the Constitution, often through litigation. The US Constitution is viewed as a higher law that limits the powers of the legislature, necessitating an institution like the courts to interpret and enforce it.

Cultural differences also influence democracy in the two countries. Winston Churchill's famous quote about the "average voter" reflects a British hesitancy towards popular sovereignty, which may explain why the UK extended voting rights much later than the US. A culture of individualism and personal liberty is more pronounced in the US, as exemplified by the Second Amendment right to "keep and bear arms" and the resistance to wearing face masks during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Judicial review

The UK and US Constitutions differ in several ways, including their history, structure, and the degree of democratic participation they afford citizens. One key difference is the presence of a written constitution in the US, which has significant implications for the role of the judiciary and the concept of judicial review.

The US Constitution, being a written document, is considered supreme and acts as a higher law above the legislature. This means that any legislative enactments must be consistent with the Constitution, and the judiciary has the power of judicial review to ensure this. The courts interpret the Constitution and hold the legislature accountable, declaring acts of the legislature invalid if they conflict with it. This power of judicial review is fundamental to Americans' understanding of the limitations placed on their government. The existence of a written constitution and the power of judicial review have made the US courts extraordinarily powerful institutions, influencing various aspects of American life and contributing to the high status of lawyers in the country.

In contrast, the UK Constitution is unwritten and based on common law and parliamentary sovereignty. The UK's constitution is flexible and can be changed or amended by Parliament with relative ease, as it is not bound by a single document. The British system does not have a concept of judicial review like that in the US. While the UK also has a judiciary and a Supreme Court, Parliament retains the authority to set aside judicial decisions and interpret legislative acts without the same level of constitutional constraint. This reflects the traditional British principle of the sovereignty and supremacy of Parliament.

The differences in the constitutions' approaches to judicial review and legislative power reflect varying attitudes towards popular sovereignty. The US Constitution, with its written form and judicial review, provides Americans with a more extensive role in the electoral processes and a stronger culture of individualism and personal liberty. In contrast, the UK's unwritten constitution and parliamentary sovereignty have historically limited democratic participation, with British citizens being "subjects of the Crown." However, it is worth noting that the UK has been moving towards greater democratic inclusion, and reforms indicate a shift away from the absolute supremacy of Parliament.

Elected officials

The UK and US constitutions differ in terms of elected officials in several ways. Firstly, the US Constitution allows Americans a much greater role in the electoral processes of their nation than the UK Constitution does for British citizens. The US has a long history of direct elections, with the US House of Representatives being elected on a far wider franchise than the UK House of Commons as early as the 1780s. The US Senate has also been directly elected since 1914, whereas the UK's second chamber, the House of Lords, has no elected members at all.

The UK and US also differ in the frequency of elections and the number of elected posts. US citizens are likely to participate in many more types of elections throughout their lives compared to UK citizens. In addition to federal elections, Americans also vote for a range of elected officials at the state level, including sheriffs, prosecutors, and school and library boards.

The UK, on the other hand, has an emphasis on representative democracy and parliamentary sovereignty. British citizens are technically ''subjects of the Crown' and have fewer opportunities for democratic participation. The UK did not extend the right to vote to its citizens as early as the US, reflecting a historical hesitancy towards popular sovereignty.

The UK and US constitutions also differ in terms of the process for changing the length of terms for elected officials. In the US, the length of terms for members of the House of Representatives and the Senate is fixed in the Constitution and can only be changed through an amendment. In contrast, the length of terms for members of the UK House of Commons is fixed by an Act of Parliament, which can be changed through another Act of Parliament passed by simple majorities in both houses.

Finally, the US Constitution entrenches certain rights and liberties, such as the Second Amendment right to 'keep and bear arms', which are more difficult to amend compared to the UK, where certain rights, such as gun ownership, can be changed by statute law.

Explore related products

Originalism's Promise: A Natural Law Account of the American Constitution

$37.68 $43

The Federalist Papers (Signet Classics)

$8.12 $8.95

The Birth of the Republic, 1763-89, Fourth Edition (The Chicago History of American Civilization)

$19 $17.19

British Origins and American Practice of Impeachment (Routledge Frontiers in Accountability Studies)

$52.29 $56.99

World War I and the American Constitution (Cambridge Studies on the American Constitution)

$75

Noble Undertaking: Volume 1: The Continental Congress and the American Revolution, 1774–78

$14.21 $39.95

Rights and liberties

The United States Constitution entrenches rights and liberties, including the Second Amendment right to 'keep and bear arms'. However, in the United Kingdom, the rights of gun owners can be changed by statute law, as evidenced by the ban on handguns after the Dunblaine school shooting. This example illustrates the broader cultural difference between the two nations, with a culture of individualism and personal liberty more prevalent in the US than in the UK. For instance, during the COVID-19 pandemic, many Americans refused to wear face masks, citing individual liberty as a reason.

The UK, with its uncodified constitution, emphasises representative democracy and parliamentary sovereignty. British citizens are technically 'subjects of the Crown' and have fewer opportunities for democratic participation than Americans. The US Constitution grants its citizens a more extensive role in the nation's electoral processes. Between the 1780s and 1880s, the US House of Representatives was elected based on a much broader franchise than the UK House of Commons. The US Senate has been directly elected since 1914, while the UK's second chamber has no elected members.

The existence of a written constitution in the US and a higher law beyond the legislature's reach has led to the development of a powerful judicial system. The courts play a significant role in interpreting the higher law and holding the legislature accountable. This dynamic has resulted in the courts becoming extraordinarily powerful institutions in American government and life. Consequently, the US legal system has played a pivotal role in shaping Americans' understanding of their rights as individuals, particularly in the 20th century.

In contrast, the UK constitution is not codified into a single document but is instead found in Parliament, where laws are set out through collaboration between the Prime Minister and Parliament members. This arrangement grants Parliament the authority to amend or set aside judicial decisions with relative ease, providing flexibility to the British political system. The absence of a written constitution in the UK makes it easier to change laws, as there is no need to follow the stringent rules in place in the US for amending their written constitution.

Historical context

The historical context of the differences between the American and British constitutions can be traced back to the colonial era. The American Revolution, which began in 1775, was a pivotal moment in the divergence of the two systems. The colonists' grievances centred on their lack of representation in the British Parliament, which imposed taxes on them without their consent. This sparked a debate over legal interpretation and the extent of Parliament's power over the colonies, with some questioning whether Parliament had lawful authority over them at all. The colonies' argument rested on the principle that, as British subjects, they were entitled to the same privileges as those in Britain.

The Second Continental Congress, meeting in Philadelphia in May 1775, took a more radical stance in response to the clashes between militia and British troops at Lexington and Concord. While appeals were made to the British people and King, the Congress also raised an army, adopted a Declaration of the Causes, and appointed committees to manage domestic supply and foreign affairs. These steps marked a significant shift towards independence, though most colonial leaders still hoped for reconciliation. The British government's interventions in colonial affairs, such as the Tea Act of 1773, further strained relations.

The United States Constitution, which began with this revolution, stands in contrast to the British Constitution, which has evolved over centuries with origins dating back over 800 years. The US Constitution, established in 1787, has remained largely unchanged since then. On the other hand, the UK Constitution has continued to evolve significantly over the past two centuries, demonstrating a key difference in their approaches to constitutional change.

Another significant historical context is the concept of popular sovereignty and democracy. The US Constitution grants Americans a more substantial role in the electoral processes, reflecting their belief in popular sovereignty. The US House of Representatives had a broader franchise than the UK House of Commons as early as the 1780s, and the US Senate has been directly elected since 1914, while the UK's second chamber has no elected members. The US Constitution's emphasis on individual rights and liberties, such as the Second Amendment, has led to a strong culture of individualism and personal liberty in the country.

The absence of a codified Constitution in the UK underscores its commitment to representative democracy and parliamentary sovereignty. British citizens are technically ""subjects of the Crown," and their opportunities for democratic participation are more limited compared to Americans. The UK's approach to constitutional flexibility allows for easier amendments to laws, ensuring that the Prime Minister and Parliament have significant influence over legislative changes.

Frequently asked questions