Example of essay on comparing constitution: five differences between the us federal constitution and

1. Federal vs. State Level
The clearest difference between the United States (US) federal constitution and the Arizona state constitution is their jurisdictional operation. The federal constitution operates throughout the US, while the Arizona state constitution operates only within Arizona. Provisions under the federal constitution operate at the national level; no state constitution within the US may impede or contradict any of the provisions therein. On the other hand, the Arizona state constitution addresses matters specific to Arizona, although the provisions therein are in compliance with the federal constitution. One could not claim that the Arizona state constitution, as with all other state constitutions in the US, is just a redundancy of the federal constitution. The federal system of the US – which the federal constitution itself elaborates, grants each state the autonomy to issue their own laws, particularly the state constitution.
2. Functional Differences
Unlike the federal constitution, the Arizona state constitution is noticeably longer in form, just like its other state counterparts. Such provides for the differences in the functionality of the Arizona state constitution to that of the federal constitution – it has limits to plenary powers and has originated from the mandate of the people of the state. The mandate of the people of Arizona reflects the state-specific concerns of the Arizona state constitution, although none of the provisions should go against the federal constitution.
3. Revision Procedures
Amending the federal constitution requires two processes – the approval for adoption by both the House of Representatives and the Senate and the subsequent ratification of the amendment by all 50 states. The Arizona state constitution, on the other hand, may incorporate amendments subject to proposals coming from the legislature, constitutional commission and constitutional convention. Thus, a closer look would reveal that the Arizona state constitution is easier to amend due to the availability of more modes of amendment, which in turn involves the participation of people residing in the state. The federal constitution, on the other hand, does not involve direct participation in the amendment process given the sheer size of its jurisdiction. Rather, the federal constitution issues its amendments based on how representatives of each state from both the House of Representatives and the Senate would decide in the ratification phase of the amendment process. Such procedure, therefore, makes the effective introduction of amendments to the federal constitution more complicated, given that such opens opportunities for national debates on the subject matter.
4. Reflection of Concerns by Minority Groups
The federal constitution was issued at a time when minority groups were not widespread in the US. Yet, following waves of migration from other nations, the federal constitution remained static and non-specific to the concerns of minority groups. The Arizona state constitution – as with all other states, contain provisions that highlight the concerns of minority groups. Given the relatively easier amendment process of the Arizona state constitution compared to the federal constitution, minority groups within Arizona gain more benefits specific to their state.
5. Policy Orientation
As the fundamental law of the US, the federal constitution is more skeletal in nature – it does not necessarily recommend the creation of specific policies, but is better oriented towards maintaining the overall integrity of the national legal system. The Arizona state constitution, however, is more oriented towards the creation of particular state-level policies, such that it allows for the due participation of people in proposing amendments and the state budget.