How does judicial supremacy differ from parliamentary supremacy?

The primary distinction between judicial supremacy and parliamentary supremacy lies in which institution holds the ultimate authority to interpret and enforce constitutional principles.1

Judicial Supremacy

Under the doctrine of judicial supremacy, courts possess the authority to determine the validity of legislation and executive actions. If a court finds a statute incompatible with a written constitution, it may declare that law null and void. This system is characteristic of countries with written constitutions, such as the United States, where the judiciary acts as the final arbiter of constitutional meaning through judicial review.12

Parliamentary Supremacy

In contrast, parliamentary supremacy—often associated with the United Kingdom—vests supreme legal authority in the legislature. In this model, courts generally lack the power to invalidate statutes, even if they are considered unconstitutional. Parliament is viewed as having the power to enact or repeal any law, and constitutional changes can often be made through the same legislative procedures used for ordinary bills. While courts in such systems still interpret laws, they remain bound by the statutes passed by the legislature.13