The document analyzes and compares the constitutions of the United States and Italy. Both constitutions were drafted as rejections of their countries' antidemocratic pasts - the US Constitution rejected British rule, while Italy's rejected fascism. However, their approaches differ: the US Constitution focuses on limiting government power, while Italy's grants extensive rights to citizens. Both establish similar governmental structures, but Italy's constitution provides for more social and economic rights like healthcare and equal pay. Overall, the constitutions demonstrate the different historical experiences that shaped each country.

1. Page 1
Owen Phelps
Italian Politics and Society
Argentieri
30/9/14
An Analysis of the United States and Italian Constitutions
The current nation state of Italy is not even 160 years old, but the history since its foundation
as a single entity in 1861 is best described as tempestuous. Modern Italy has transitioned from
Constitutional Monarchy to Fascist dictatorship, and most recently, to a Republic in a span of less
than 30 years. It seems as though the people of Italy have been unable to decide for themselves what
form of government is best, which is rather humorous, since the Italian peninsula has had an unique
experience of almost 3000 years of living under various Emperors, Kings, Popes and Consuls to
decide the most optimal system. The United States, in contrast, has had a fairly uninteresting political
history, save for the War of Independence and the Civil War: the only two moments in its history
where the validity of its political system was called into question. The developments of these two
Republics is reflected within their respective constitutions, which not only demonstrates the universal
appeal of America’s constitution, but also that of Italy’s historical experiences with so many forms of
government.
There exists a substantial gap in time of 150 years between the development of the United
States and the Italian Republic, which can be clearly seen in the basic framework of each constitution
(Newell 54). The foci of each document differs radically – which not only is a reflection of
contextual political and historical periods of which they were written – but also due to the ill
experiences of previous governments. Italy, for instance, introduces its constitution with a set of
articles known as Fundamental Principles, which outline the rights enjoyed by every citizen of the
Republic, and provides protection against abuse and discrimination of state power based upon
gender, race, nationality, religion and language (Italian Constitution Article 2). It not only establishes

2. Page 2
the limitations of how the state is to function, but also sets out conditions which the republic is to
fulfill. For example, the Italian Constitution details that the state is “…to remove those obstacles of
an economic or social nature which constrain the freedom and equality of citizens, thereby impeding
the full development of the human person and the effective participation of all workers in the
political, economic and social organization of the country.” (Italian Constitution Article 3). These
fundamentals were outlined mostly as a reaction to the country’s experience with Fascism, where
Mussolini and his regime violated many civil and political rights in the name of his numerous
imperial projects, which saw minorities of all kinds (linguistic, religious and cultural) being
persecuted, and the state forced upon every facet of society (Newell 22). Such a strong sentiment of
rejection of cannot be more evident than by the first article of the Italian Constitution which reads:
“Sovereignty belongs to the people and is exercised by the people in the forms and within the limits
of the Constitution.” (Italian Constitution Article 1).
The United States shares a commonality with the Italian Constitution in such a way, though it
is expressed differently. The American Constitution was written as a rejection of its unpleasant
experience of the British Monarchy, which the Founding Fathers – as Englishmen – felt that their
civil and political rights were being ignored, and exploited, based upon their lack of geographic
proximity to London. As such, while the Constitution of the United States was to protect against the
abuse of power from a powerful sovereign, the first Article achieves this by establishing the frame of
the United States’ government: “All legislative Powers herein granted shall be vested in a Congress
of the United States, which shall consist of a Senate and House of Representatives.” (US Constitution
Article 1) and is further detailed in the 8th section: “The Congress shall have Power To lay and
collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence
and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform
throughout the United States.” (US Constitution Article 8). Within Article I, the United States sets
out the boundaries of the government, along with how the government is to function – be it detailed

3. Page 3
in how the Senate is to be composed, or the qualifications in which one needs to become a
government official (US Constitution Article 1). In contrast with the Italian Constitution’s
Fundamental Principles that institute how the state ought to behave – and stresses the sovereignty of
the people as a counterbalance to the government’s power – the United States Constitution outlines
what the government is limited to, and that is the safeguard in which the people are protected. In
essence, each constitution provides the same protections to the people, but while one is explicitly
stated, the other implies. What is clear, however, is that both of these constitutions were drafted as a
break from an antidemocratic past, thus explains the emphasis on restricting the state’s power in
favour of more autonomy to the people.
Following the Fundamental Principles, the Italian Constitution proceeding section, entitled
The Rights and Duties of Citizens, bears a close resemblance to that of the Bill of Rights of the
American Constitution. However, while the Bill of Rights was added after the initial drafting (as the
first 10 amendments to the constitution) the Italian Constitution includes them directly. What is
noticeable within this section of the Italian Constitution is how approximate its rights and guarantees
to the citizens of the Republic are to that of the United States. For instance, Article’s 13 through 28
state that individual liberty is inviolable, that each citizen has the right to move freely without
impediment, is able to peacefully assemble, and that searches and seizures of one’s person, property
or home is illegal – save for circumstances issued by the Judiciary (Italian Constitution Article 13,
14, 15, 16, 17). This all bears a close resemblance to the first 10 amendments which constitute the
Bill of Rights, which contains articles that guarantee the freedom of speech, worship, with separation
of Church and State, the ability to peacefully assemble, a fair trial by jury, and the illegality of
unreasonable searches (US Constitution Amendments 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7). The only real difference
between these two sections is the inclusion of the Second Amendment, which allows for citizens to
possess firearms – an amendment that clearly demonstrates the period in which the United States
Constitution was drafted – and the article within the Italian Constitution that explicitly forbids the

4. Page 4
death penalty as a means of punishment for a convicted felon. Due to the similar nature that these
two documents relate to each other, one can readily infer that the United States Constitution might
have exhibited considerable influence on the Italian Constitution: each of these documents defines
the rights and protections of each citizen, and further details what the state is legally bound, in
relation to the populace. However, Italy’s rights it guarantees for its citizens could very well have
been due to the Fascist legacy that the country had to cope with after the breakup of the Mussolini
Government, along with the fact that the Socialist and Communist parties – which stresses Marxian
ideals such as civil rights and human development – was such a prominent force in the Constitution’s
drafting (Newell 51).
Within the proceeding sections, entitled Ethical and Social Rights and Duties, Economic
Rights and Duties and Political Rights and Duties, is where the Italian Constitution diverges
considerably from that of the its American counterpart. The United States’ Constitution contains
several sections within its seven initial articles that outline how the government may act, and the
basic necessities that it is to provide – though not on such meticulous detail as that of the Italian
Constitution. For example, the United States government is to coin money, establish post offices and
roads, along with possessing the ability to raise and support marine and ground armed forces, and
borrow money (US Constitution Article 1). As a whole, these duties conferred to the United States
Government are general, and impersonal, and focus mainly on supporting the nation. The Italian
Constitution, however, includes duties that include providing for family care, and particularizes that
the state is to pay for not only child support, but for basic education and provide for healthcare
– which is considered a fundamental right in Italy (Italian Constitution Article 29, 30, 31, 32, 35).
Even more divergent from its American counterpart which contains no specifications of how the
economic system of the United States is to work, the Italian Constitution elaborates that not only is it
the state’s duty to protect work, and provide for training so that the citizens can work, it also includes
(most importantly) the right that women ought to be paid equally for the same work that men preform

5. Page 5
(Italian Constitution Articles 35, 36, 37). The United States Constitution has no safeguards, nor
guarantees that workers receive such benefits, nor does it state that women are entitled to equal pay
for equal work. Again, the differing stances found within these two constitutions over economic
rights, and the state’s duty to its citizens is perhaps more of a reflection of the periods in which they
were written in: for instance, the Italian Constitution was authored when issues such as worker’s
rights, Communism, Trade Unions and the like were a prominent political force, whereas 18th
century America did not need to worry about such political ideas, and took Capitalism as more of a
given system rather than an option among choices. The only issue with the Italian Constitution in this
regard is that while it has so many rights and duties towards its citizens’ benefit, it also leaves itself
with the perplexing question as to how much provision is enough, and to what extent is it feasible for
the state to fulfill these obligations – as was seen with Article Three found within the Fundamental
Principles.
The final sections of the Italian Constitution revolve around the structure of the Italian
Government, which is very similar to that of the United States: both nations have a separate lower
house and upper house (the upper house are both named the Senate), and at the head of the nation
stands the President, along with a Judiciary, which completes the triangle of power (Newell 56). It is
within this section entitled Organizations of the Republic in which the two constitutions most closely
resemble each other; both constitutions outline that a democratic process is to be held by a regional
basis in order to elect members to either the House of Representative, or the Parliament, and each
document specifies how old one must be in order to be considered for a governmental post: “Senators
are elected by universal and direct suffrage by voters who are twenty-five years of age. Voters who
have attained the age of forty are eligible to be elected to the Senate.”(Italian Constitution Article
58). While the American Constitutions describes the eligible candidate as such: “No Person shall be a
Representative who shall not have attained to the Age of twenty five Years, and been seven Years a
Citizen of the United States, and who shall not, when elected, be an Inhabitant of that State in which

6. Page 6
he shall be chosen.” (US Constitution Article 1, Section 2). The Italian Constitution also designates
that the number of representatives for each region within the country is to be based off of the
population of said region – almost identical to that of the United States (Italian Constitution Article
57). However, the Italian Legislature works around a bicameral system, wherein which the two
branches of the Legislature have equal powers, which allows for greater debates when passing laws
– but that comes with the expense of productivity (Newell 59). Again, the United States Constitution
and the Italian Constitution outline very similar methods of governing, while detailing very different
systems, which are unique to each country.
The Italian President is elected into office by an assembly and serves for a term of seven
years, unlike that of the American President whom is directly elected, and holds office for four years
(Newell 56). Another power invested within the Italian President is the ability to dissolve Parliament,
which the American President is unable to do (Newell 57). However, the reason for such powers
invested within the President of Italy is due to the nature of the office to be more of a mediator, rather
than an executive like of that in the United States “… the supreme function of the President is to
mediate and regulate with the aim of ensuring that political processes are carried on without
threatening national integration.” (Newell 58). However, much of what the Italian President is bound
to do is alike to that of the American President, such as introducing laws passed by the Legislature,
appointing government officials, receive diplomatic officials, and acts as the Commander-in-Chief of
the Armed Forces – almost identical to how the American President functions (Italian Constitution
Article 87). Though this may seem to be a direct influence from the United States, it could very well
be a simple matter of logical convenience: a head of state tends to lead an army.
The Judiciary, like that of the United States, is set apart from the other three branches of
government, and functions as its own entity to avoid concentration of power within one department
or office, as is established in the Italian Constitution “The provisions concerning the organisation of
the Judiciary and the judges are laid out by law. The law ensures the independence of judges of

7. Page 7
special courts, of state prosecutors of those courts, and of other persons participating in the
administration of justice.” (Italian Constitution Article 108). The United States Constitution works in
a similar fashion: “In all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls, and those
in which a State shall be Party, the supreme Court shall have original Jurisdiction. In all the other
Cases before mentioned, the supreme Court shall have appellate Jurisdiction, both as to Law and
Fact.” (US Constitution Article 6). However, despite the closeness in their functions, the Italian
Constitution contains within it an act which allows citizens to be protected from any abuse of power,
and allows citizens to appeal cases to that of the Court of Cassation (Newell 61). This court allows
for citizens to challenge rulings conducted by the Supreme Court, if said citizen believes that the law
has been violated due to their sentence (Newell 61). No such ability exists directly within the United
States Constitution that allows for citizens to repeal sentences passed by the Supreme Court.
Overall, the United States and the Italian Constitution appear to be very similar in their
governmental and political makeup. While both states have a noticeable distance between them in
terms of age, the two countries share a common feature between them that has lead them to construct
very similar systems. For example, the Colonial Americans in the 18th century were denied their
basic rights as Englishmen, and sought to appeal their case to a Parliament that became increasingly
deaf due to the geographical distance. As such, while the Americans never experienced any real
tyranny (the American Revolution was instigated over taxes on tea) the Italian people did under the
Fascist regime which actively persecuted citizens of the country, along with allying the Italian people
with the likes of Adolf Hitler. Hence, the American Constitution appears to be more focused around
limiting the power of government through setting up clear boundaries and divisions of power, while
the Italian Constitution extends that further, by granting more detailed rights and privileges to the
citizenry, to demonstrate their sovereignty over the state (which manifest themselves through social,
economic and political rights). However, and to recapitulate a previous point, the American
Constitution seems to lack any consideration for economic and social rights which the Italian

8. Page 8
citizenry take for granted. For example, the Italian Constitution details its duty to the people through
providing means for the populace to work, while providing them the benefits of universal healthcare
and family support – the United States doesn’t do that. However, while this lacking may be due to
the American Constitution’s age, the Italian Constitution also shows its date through ill-conceived
“duties" to the people that – while admirable – are also difficult and impractical to carry out. Article
Three within the Fundamental Principles, for instance demonstrates this issue perfectly, which
elaborates that the State must encourage human development, and is required to remove all obstacles
impeding said development.
Works Cited
Italian Constitution, art. 1, art. 2, art. 3, art. 29, art. 30, art. 31, art. 32, art. 35, art. 36, art. 37, art. 58,
art. 87, art. 108
James Newell, The Politics of Italy: Governance in a Normal Country, Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 2010.
U.S. Constitution, art. 1, sec. 2., art. 3, art. 4, art. 5, art. 6, art. 8