essay: examine the differences in how rights are protected in the US and the UK

US:

UK:

AO2 analysis:

codified constitution = clear definition and enshrinement of individual rights eg freedom of speech, religion etc » right to bear arms (2nd amendment)

uncodified constitution = reliant on legislation, setting precedents n HRA » equality act 2010

US has more protected rights because they are enshrined, whereas UK rights are at whim of Parliament (eg Conservative Bill of Rights)

US courts have the power of judicial review

UK can interpret legislation, but can’t strike down Parliamentary Acts

Supreme Court in the USA is the ultimate court on all issues » Roe v Wade >> Dobbs v Jackson Health

Supreme Court in the UK has more limited power when it comes to rights and can be overruled by the European Court of Human Rights » Ashers v Lee

Supreme Court in US protects rights based on constit, whereas UK does it on common law. so the UK is stronger at protecting rights because it has kept itself ‘up to dare’ with the times

US interest groups, due to federalism, have many access points n less restrictions in terms of making an impact » Power of the NRA 2008 DC v Heller

UK interest groups only have a few access points to make an impact nationally ie MP » even devolved areas don’t have much of a say » Best for Britain

UK is more protected bc there’s less interference from interest groups in getting things done meaning more of a ‘filter’ on rights

US Supreme Court can declare acts unconstitutional, essentially making that law illegal. they have the ‘impact’ of a legislature » Obergefell vs Hodges 2014

Supreme Court can declare a law incompatible “ultra vires” » Parliament can overrule this by Act of Parliament » Rwanda Bill

US SC rulings are longer lasting because it is difficult to change the constit, whereas UK SC bows to Parliamentary Sovereignty and is therefore less protected