Apples and Oranges

Abstract

Abstract This chapter argues that the Cour de cassation of France, the Supreme Court of the United States, and the European Court of Justice are truly emblematic courts, courts whose discursive practices and conceptual frameworks characterise those of their respective judicial systems. Each of these three judicial systems possesses defining conceptual structures and discursive practices that go a long way towards making those systems what they are. What makes the French judicial system French, the European system European, and the American system American are formal, discursive, and conceptual attributes that manifest themselves throughout those judicial systems, attributes that surface again and again despite the obvious variation in the parties, the subject matter, the legal issues, and the like handled by the assorted courts in question. This chapter compares the judicial discourses of the three courts as well as their judicial argumentation and judicial decisions.