注释,注释: The article discusses the creation of integration regional international associations, which at times become not only international unions, but also acquire elements of certain public power, a particular public-legal form, and can create its regional supranational (“supra-state”) law. At this time it fully applies only to the European Union, but other integration unions can also follow this path (for example, the EAEU). Using the methods of political science, science of state, and comparative-legal methods of studying this new phenomenon, the author concludes that in the EU there is an incomplete public power sui generis, which is not a state power, but has elements of statehood, operates special supranational law, which takes precedence over the law of member-states, and changes the concept of state sovereignty. Its member-states retain state sovereignty, but self-restrict some of its elements. But all of this takes place only within certain framework: certain sovereign rights and government powers voluntarily transferred to the EU by the member-states.

注释,注释: The article discusses the creation of integration regional international associations, which at times become not only international unions, but also acquire elements of certain public power, a particular public-legal form, and can create its regional supranational (“supra-state”) law. At this time it fully applies only to the European Union, but other integration unions can also follow this path (for example, the EAEU). Using the methods of political science, science of state, and comparative-legal methods of studying this new phenomenon, the author concludes that in the EU there is an incomplete public power sui generis, which is not a state power, but has elements of statehood, operates special supranational law, which takes precedence over the law of member-states, and changes the concept of state sovereignty. Its member-states retain state sovereignty, but self-restrict some of its elements. But all of this takes place only within certain framework: certain sovereign rights and government powers voluntarily transferred to the EU by the member-states.

注释,注释: The author examines the classifications of legal systems and legal families that exist in the Russian and foreign literature, and notices their inaccuracies. The terms "legal system" and "legal family" are often used interchangeably, different social essence of the major legal systems is ignored. Anglo-Saxon law and totalitarian socialist legal system are in the same classification unit. It is offered new approaches and synthesis. The author uses the historical, logical, deductive, inductive and comparative research methods, applies the formational-civilizational approach and, on this basis, identifies three major legal systems in the modern world: the Muslim system, liberal semi-social capitalist system and the totalitarian socialist system. On the basis of socio-culturological legal approach within each of the global systems, the author highlights the legal families. In the Moslem system there are fundamentalist (radical) and modernized (upgraded) legal families, but also for another reason - the Sunni and Shiite communities legal families, in the liberal semi-social capitalist system there are Anglo Saxon, the Romano-German and other families, in the totalitarian socialist system - orthodox Leninist-Bolshevik and modernized partly, upgraded (but only in the area of economic regulation) family.

注释,注释: The author examines the classifications of legal systems and legal families that exist in the Russian and foreign literature, and notices their inaccuracies. The terms "legal system" and "legal family" are often used interchangeably, different social essence of the major legal systems is ignored. Anglo-Saxon law and totalitarian socialist legal system are in the same classification unit. It is offered new approaches and synthesis. The author uses the historical, logical, deductive, inductive and comparative research methods, applies the formational-civilizational approach and, on this basis, identifies three major legal systems in the modern world: the Muslim system, liberal semi-social capitalist system and the totalitarian socialist system. On the basis of socio-culturological legal approach within each of the global systems, the author highlights the legal families. In the Moslem system there are fundamentalist (radical) and modernized (upgraded) legal families, but also for another reason - the Sunni and Shiite communities legal families, in the liberal semi-social capitalist system there are Anglo Saxon, the Romano-German and other families, in the totalitarian socialist system - orthodox Leninist-Bolshevik and modernized partly, upgraded (but only in the area of economic regulation) family.

注释,注释: The author examines the classifications of legal systems and legal families that exist in the Russian and foreign literature, and notices their inaccuracies. The terms “legal system” and “legal family” are often used interchangeably, different social essence of the major legal systems is ignored. Anglo-Saxon law and totalitarian socialist legal system are in the same classification unit. It is offered new approaches and synthesis. The author uses the historical, logical, deductive, inductive and comparative research methods, applies the formational-civilizational approach and, on this basis, identifies three major legal systems in the modern world: the Muslim system, liberal semi-social capitalist system and the totalitarian socialist system. On the basis of socio-culturological legal approach within each of the global systems, the author highlights the legal families. In the Moslem system there are fundamentalist (radical) and modernized (upgraded) legal families, but also for another reason - the Sunni and Shiite communities legal families, in the liberal semi-social capitalist system there are Anglo Saxon, the Romano-German and other families, in the totalitarian socialist system - orthodox Leninist-Bolshevik and modernized partly, upgraded (but only in the area of economic regulation) family.

注释,注释: On the basis of a comparison of foreign and Russian constitutions the article discusses the legal language of the Russian Constitution. The author especially tackles such questions enshrined in Russian constitution as: the constitutional provisions concerning economic, social, political and spiritual life of the community. However, the article also refers to some shortcomings of the Constitution that was integrated in the text during the adoption of the Constitution in 1993. The main method that uses the author is a comparative one. Other, classical legal methods are also were used during the research. The novelty of the research consist in the research of the value of the Russian Constitution in a comparative approach. Author developed the ideas of how the Russian conception should be modified in order to comply with modern standards of legal language used in contemporary connotations.

Abstract: On the basis of a comparison of foreign and Russian constitutions, the article discusses the legal language of the Russian Constitution. The author especially addresses such questions enshrined in Russian constitution as: the constitutional provisions concerning economic, social, political and spiritual life of the community. However, the article also refers to some shortcomings of the Constitution that were integrated in the text during the adoption of the Constitution in 1993. The author primarily uses the comparative scientific method. Classic legal methods are also were used during this research. The novelty of this work consists in the research of the values of the Russian Constitution in a comparative approach. The author developed the ideas of how the Russian concept should be modified in order to comply with modern standards of legal language used in contemporary connotations.