constitutional control

One of the urgent problems of the practice of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine is the implementation of its acts, the non-solution of which calls into question not only its guarantee of the supremacy of the Constitution of Ukraine as the Basic Law of the state throughout Ukraine, but also the authority of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine as a body of constitutional jurisdiction. The fulfillment by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine of the tasks assigned to it is achieved not so much by adopting the relevant acts as by their implementation and implementation.

 The article deals with the peculiarities of the emergence and development of basic models of constitutional justice. The formation of a particular model of constitutional control in each country is linked to the historical, social, economic, national, legislative preconditions for the emergence of a particular model. Described the main features of the European, American and amparo models of constitutional justice. Emphasized that in the territory of our country the issue of the creation of a constitutional justice body was impossible before Ukraine gained independence.

The article analyzes the problem of constitutional control of the US Supreme Court in the context of its historical development. The US Supreme Court, in the exercise of its judicial function, establishes the constitutionality of statutory acts and actions of public authorities and their officials. It has been determined that two diametrically opposed concepts have historically emerged about the advisability of the Supreme Court of the United States to address issues of political importance -“judicial restraint” and “judicial activism”.