{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.024520255863539446, 'fraction_numerical': 0.0042643923240938165, 'mean_word_length': 5.804347826086956, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Constitutional Transplants, Borrowing, and Migrations

This paper, which will be published in the Oxford Handbook on Comparative Constitutional Law (M. Rosenfeld & A. Sajo, eds., forthcoming 2012), explores the borrowing and migration of constitutional ideas and institutions across jurisdictions. Despite the fact that comparative constitutional law is a form of comparative law, comparative constitutionalism has thus far largely ignored the rich debates in comparative law on the topic of legal transplants. I argue that those debates can illuminate our understanding of how constitutional doctrines and ideas travel. After noting the missing legacy of comparative legal thought in the constitutional realm, the paper studies the anatomy of constitutional transplants (object, timing, motivations and patterns) and provides a framework for their normative justifications. The paper concludes with remarks on constitutional convergence.