ABSTRACT
This chapter explores a few central aspects of the relationship between comprehensive doctrines and political liberalism. It reviews John Rawls's two views of the basis of equality and assesses the relevance of these views to his claim that certain amendments are unconstitutional and must be declared invalid by the Supreme Court. The chapter discusses some contemporary examples of the distinction and the bearing they may have on constitutional law. It proposes a way of mitigating the seemingly irreconcilable positions of those who, like Rawls, claim that the Supreme Court must declare invalid an amendment repealing core constitutional freedoms, and those who claim that the Court should abstain from making such a decision. Rawls's distinction between comprehensive doctrines and a freestanding conception of political justice was in significant respects implicit in the work that preceded and eventually culminated in the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
