Rex D. Glensy


This Article seeks to clarify the current debate concerning the use of non-U.S. persuasive authority within the context of constitutional interpretation. It begins by noting that commentary on comparative constitutional law often fails to make any distinction between foreign domestic sources and international law used comparatively, and thus risks evoking parallels between different systems of law that lack context and plausibility. It then draws on various normative theories and underpinnings of both domestic and international legal regimes to show that a proper comparative enterprise must take this distinction into account. The Article concludes by explaining that only when those policy goals of international law and domestic law coincide should international law materials be called upon as sources of persuasive authority for domestic constitutional interpretation

Included in

Law Commons



To view the content in your browser, please download Adobe Reader or, alternately,
you may Download the file to your hard drive.

NOTE: The latest versions of Adobe Reader do not support viewing PDF files within Firefox on Mac OS and if you are using a modern (Intel) Mac, there is no official plugin for viewing PDF files within the browser window.