Comparative Constitutional Reasoning
Comparative Constitutional Reasoning is a systematic legal methodology that belongs to the broader field of comparative legal reasoning, specifically characterized by the analysis and juxtaposition of constitutional doctrines, principles, and judicial reasoning across different jurisdictions to identify structural, functional, and normative similarities and differences in constitutional interpretation and adjudication.
53
Publications
2.7K
Citations
52
Authors
37
Institutions
Publications per year
2017–2026
10
Parents
53
The Possibilities of Comparative Constitutional Law
Mark Tushnet · The Yale Law Journal · 1999 · 282 citations · Full text
1–5 of 53
52
3
h-index
2
h-index
London School of Economics and Political Science, United Kingdom
2 publications · 57 citations
2
h-index
2
h-index
2
h-index
1–5 of 52
37
Fordham University
New York, United States
2 h-index
2 publications
54 citations
Yale University
New Haven, United States
2 h-index
2 publications
33 citations

UNSW Sydney
Sydney, Australia
2 h-index
2 publications
28 citations

Pennsylvania State University
State College, United States
2 h-index
2 publications
75 citations

University of Hong Kong
Pok Fu Lam, Hong Kong
2 h-index
2 publications
91 citations
Max Planck Society
Munich, Germany
2 h-index
2 publications
100 citations

Harvard University Press
Cambridge, United States
2 h-index
2 publications
28 citations

Victoria University of Wellington
Wellington, New Zealand
2 h-index
2 publications
28 citations
1–8 of 37
7 publications · 393 citations
7
h-index
Repository · 6 publications · 183 citations
6
h-index
4 publications · 90 citations
4
h-index
3 publications · 100 citations
3
h-index
GlobCon · 2 publications · 32 citations
2
h-index
1–5