Posted in Comparing the US and UK

Differences between the UK and US Constitution

What is the US Constitution and why isn't there a British Constitution? -  Fun Kids - the UK's children's radio station

Codified vs Uncodified

The UK has an uncodified constitution – meaning it is not written in a single document and has multiple sources. Whilst it is unwritten, parts of the constitution are written including Common Law, Acts of Parliament and authoritative works which are guides to how the constitution works. The constitution has evolved over time.

The US has a codified constitution. This means the basis of all US government and the laws of the land are all in one document. Whilst it is a written document, the US constitution does have uncodified parts because it does not mention the cabinet, the Executive Office of the President, judicial review or primary elections. The constitution was ratified in 1798 in a single document consisting of 7 articles and 27 amendments added after.

Entrenched vs Unentrenched

The UK constitution is unentrenched and so it is easily changed through an Act of Parliament which is passed by a majority vote in both houses of Parliament. Parliamentary sovereignty in the UK means that no parliament can pass a law that can’t be changed by future parliaments. In 1997, the UK easily passed the Firearms Act which banned the use of handguns in the UK.

The US constitution is entrenched meaning that it is difficult to change. Changing the US constitution requires a supermajority (which is two-thirds of the members in both houses of Congress) in support of the amendment. This means that the 2nd amendment – the ‘right to bear arms’ – is extremely difficult to change, unlike in the UK.

Why it's finally time for Britain to adopt a written constitution.
The US and UK constitutions differ over principles of checks and balances, separation of powers, democracy and sovereignty

Provisions, Democracy and Sovereignty

Representative democracy and parliamentary sovereignty are outlined in the UK constitution. The Prime Minister is not directly elected but is the leader of the winning party, compared to the President in the US who is directly elected. The UK has elections for the House of Commons but members of the House of Lords are appointed and not elected. Parliamentary sovereignty is a key principle of the UK constitution meaning that it has supreme authority as the representative of the people, and has the ultimate law-making power.

Direct democracy and popular sovereignty are more clearly seen in the US constitution. Both the Senate and House of Representatives are directly elected. American citizens can directly choose the presidential and congressional candidates through the primary elections. However, the President is not directly elected: they must win the electoral college.

Both constitutions divide their national government into three branches: an executive, judiciary and legislature. The UK and US constitutions outline representative democracies where citizens vote for politicians to represent them. The constitutions state the need for a bicameral legislature, meaning that the legislature has two law-making bodies.

Checks and Balances

The UK constitution enables powers to be concentrated in the party which won a majority in Parliament at the general election. The Prime Minister and the Executive branch formulate policies and legislative proposals for MPs to vote through Parliament. The Prime Minister will often pass their legislation through Parliament because they lead the largest party in the House of Commons.

Checks and balances are core to the US Constitution and prevent one branch of government from having too much power. Each branch can limit the power of the others:

  • The President checks the Supreme Court by appointing its judges and the Senate must vote to approve them.
  • The President can veto legislation in Congress, but Congress must vote to pass the President’s legislation and can override a presidential veto.
  • The Supreme Court can rule actions by the executive and legislation passed by Congress as unconstitutional.

Separation of Powers

The US constitution is based on the separation of powers which means that the executive, legislative and judiciary are completely separate: members of the executive cannot be members of the legislative, like in the UK. The president is not able to end a session of Congress prematurely and call new elections, whilst Congress cannot remove the whole executive and can only remove a president through impeachment.

The UK constitution is based on a fusion of powers where the branches of government overlap. Government ministers, including the Prime Minister, are also members of Parliament meaning they are the executive and legislature. Parliament can use a no-confidence vote to remove the whole government. However, the Supreme Court is separate from parliament meaning there is some separation of powers, although until 2009 the judiciary and legislature were not separated as the Law Lords were also members of the House of Lords.


Should the UK constitution become more like the US’?