UK-US Comparison
Supreme Court and Civil Rights
Topic UK USA
Basis for and - Supreme Court created in 2009, replacing the Law - Supreme Court created by Constitution in 1787 as highest
relative extent for Lords as the highest court in the UK following 2005 court in the judicial branch Structural Theory
their powers Constitutional Reform Act Structural Theory - Uphold the law and constitution, interpret meaning of the
- Uphold the law and constitution, interpret meaning of constitution Rational Theory (originalists vs living constitution)
the constitution - Vagueness in constitution, increasing their power
- Vagueness in constitution, increasing their power - More difficult to overturn Supreme Court judgement as
- Easier to overturn Supreme Court judgement as sovereignty lies in the Constitution, US Supreme Court holds
Parliament is sovereign more power, can overrule an Act of Congress. US Congress
- UK can easily pass an act of Parliament e.g Johnson would have to pass an amendment to overturn a SC
spoke of this in 2019 when proroguing Parliament judgement
Rational Theory
Relative - Judges selected through five person Select - Structural Theory More political appointment process, but
independence of Commission, of president and deputy of Court, political influence is lost when appointment is confirmed e.g
the Supreme member of Judicial Appointments Commission and 2020: Trump appointed 3/9 justices but received no support
Court equivalent in Scotland and NI, made up of legal from the Supreme Court on his claims on electoral fraud
experts - Presidents nominate and Senate confirm
- Less political influence - Partisan and ideologically driven e.g Garland/Coney Barrett
- Retirement age is 70, 75 for those appointed before Rational Theory
1995 - More political influence
- Judges can be removed by petition to the monarch - Have life tenure
by both Houses of Parliament - Judges can be impeached
Less independence: Structural Theory - Can rule against the government of the country and don’t
- Lord Chancellor: role in the executive and also face political repercussions eg Judiciary blocked Trump's
responsible for functioning of the courts Muslim travel bans, banned Obama’s immigration policy
- Attorney General + Solicitor General both - Face external pressure from politicians, media, public > more
government posts but also lead prosecutions significant in the US as court rules on controversial public
- Can rule against the government of the country and policy e.g abortion, gay marriage Cultural Theory
don’t face political repercussions eg SC found
, Johnson against proroguing Parliament in 2019
- Face external pressure from politicians, media, public
e.g Brexit, 2016, the court deemed as ‘Enemies of the
People’ by Daily Mail Cultural Theory
Effectiveness of - Stronger party system with whips and patronage - Three distinct parts of federal government + state
interest groups in making it harder for rights-focused pressure groups to governments mean a lot more access points to make changes
the protection of make an impact on individual MPs Structural Theory that are available to pressure groups Structural Theory
civil rights - Power concentrated in the hands of party leadership - Democrat presidents > more success with minority protection
and cabinet, narrow groups PG can focus on, reduced - Republican Senate > more success in pushing gun rights
access points, options are limited if can’t persuade the - Pressure groups on opposing sides on divisive issues e.g
government Structural Theory NRA v Brady - for and against guns
- Groups like Liberty have less of a profile - Higher profile on protection of rights and more successful
- Make extensive use of the courts groups e.g NAACP
- UK groups have been more successful as less issues - Make extensive use of the courts
and controversy to discuss, however Windrush - US has had more significant issues with Civil Rights e.g
Scandal, Grenfell fire, stop and search controversy, all Shelby v Holder 2013, George Floyd and BLM, Trump rhetoric,
on top of colonialism and Empire Cultural Theory all on top of slavery and segregation Cultural Theory
- Threat of terrorism has curtailed civil rights and - Threat of terrorism has curtailed civil rights and expanded
expanded police powers e.g Prevention of Terrorisim police powers e.g American Civil Liberties failed to block
Act (2005), Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill Patriot Act and Freedom Act which has concerns on
felt contradicted Human Rights Act government surveillance
- Trump took US out of UN Human Rights Council (Biden
reversed)
Effectiveness of - Tradition of civil rights, Magna Carta 1215 - Constitution has Bill of Rights, key amendments such as the
the protection of - Human Rights Act 14th amendment (no deprivation of life liberty and property)
rights in each - Not entrenched constitution meaning rights could and 15th amendment (voting rights) Structural Theory
country simply be removed by Act of Parliament Structural - Entrenched and hard to change, court rulings that support
Theory rights are hard to change e.g Roe v Wade on the rights of
-Unlikely this would happen but is possible federalism
- Promoted LGBTQ rights e.g Obergefel v Hodges, Bostock v
Clayton County
- Doesn’t always favour rights e.g Shelby v Holder, Plessey v
Supreme Court and Civil Rights
Topic UK USA
Basis for and - Supreme Court created in 2009, replacing the Law - Supreme Court created by Constitution in 1787 as highest
relative extent for Lords as the highest court in the UK following 2005 court in the judicial branch Structural Theory
their powers Constitutional Reform Act Structural Theory - Uphold the law and constitution, interpret meaning of the
- Uphold the law and constitution, interpret meaning of constitution Rational Theory (originalists vs living constitution)
the constitution - Vagueness in constitution, increasing their power
- Vagueness in constitution, increasing their power - More difficult to overturn Supreme Court judgement as
- Easier to overturn Supreme Court judgement as sovereignty lies in the Constitution, US Supreme Court holds
Parliament is sovereign more power, can overrule an Act of Congress. US Congress
- UK can easily pass an act of Parliament e.g Johnson would have to pass an amendment to overturn a SC
spoke of this in 2019 when proroguing Parliament judgement
Rational Theory
Relative - Judges selected through five person Select - Structural Theory More political appointment process, but
independence of Commission, of president and deputy of Court, political influence is lost when appointment is confirmed e.g
the Supreme member of Judicial Appointments Commission and 2020: Trump appointed 3/9 justices but received no support
Court equivalent in Scotland and NI, made up of legal from the Supreme Court on his claims on electoral fraud
experts - Presidents nominate and Senate confirm
- Less political influence - Partisan and ideologically driven e.g Garland/Coney Barrett
- Retirement age is 70, 75 for those appointed before Rational Theory
1995 - More political influence
- Judges can be removed by petition to the monarch - Have life tenure
by both Houses of Parliament - Judges can be impeached
Less independence: Structural Theory - Can rule against the government of the country and don’t
- Lord Chancellor: role in the executive and also face political repercussions eg Judiciary blocked Trump's
responsible for functioning of the courts Muslim travel bans, banned Obama’s immigration policy
- Attorney General + Solicitor General both - Face external pressure from politicians, media, public > more
government posts but also lead prosecutions significant in the US as court rules on controversial public
- Can rule against the government of the country and policy e.g abortion, gay marriage Cultural Theory
don’t face political repercussions eg SC found
, Johnson against proroguing Parliament in 2019
- Face external pressure from politicians, media, public
e.g Brexit, 2016, the court deemed as ‘Enemies of the
People’ by Daily Mail Cultural Theory
Effectiveness of - Stronger party system with whips and patronage - Three distinct parts of federal government + state
interest groups in making it harder for rights-focused pressure groups to governments mean a lot more access points to make changes
the protection of make an impact on individual MPs Structural Theory that are available to pressure groups Structural Theory
civil rights - Power concentrated in the hands of party leadership - Democrat presidents > more success with minority protection
and cabinet, narrow groups PG can focus on, reduced - Republican Senate > more success in pushing gun rights
access points, options are limited if can’t persuade the - Pressure groups on opposing sides on divisive issues e.g
government Structural Theory NRA v Brady - for and against guns
- Groups like Liberty have less of a profile - Higher profile on protection of rights and more successful
- Make extensive use of the courts groups e.g NAACP
- UK groups have been more successful as less issues - Make extensive use of the courts
and controversy to discuss, however Windrush - US has had more significant issues with Civil Rights e.g
Scandal, Grenfell fire, stop and search controversy, all Shelby v Holder 2013, George Floyd and BLM, Trump rhetoric,
on top of colonialism and Empire Cultural Theory all on top of slavery and segregation Cultural Theory
- Threat of terrorism has curtailed civil rights and - Threat of terrorism has curtailed civil rights and expanded
expanded police powers e.g Prevention of Terrorisim police powers e.g American Civil Liberties failed to block
Act (2005), Police, Crime, Sentencing and Courts Bill Patriot Act and Freedom Act which has concerns on
felt contradicted Human Rights Act government surveillance
- Trump took US out of UN Human Rights Council (Biden
reversed)
Effectiveness of - Tradition of civil rights, Magna Carta 1215 - Constitution has Bill of Rights, key amendments such as the
the protection of - Human Rights Act 14th amendment (no deprivation of life liberty and property)
rights in each - Not entrenched constitution meaning rights could and 15th amendment (voting rights) Structural Theory
country simply be removed by Act of Parliament Structural - Entrenched and hard to change, court rulings that support
Theory rights are hard to change e.g Roe v Wade on the rights of
-Unlikely this would happen but is possible federalism
- Promoted LGBTQ rights e.g Obergefel v Hodges, Bostock v
Clayton County
- Doesn’t always favour rights e.g Shelby v Holder, Plessey v
