Abstract
The article reconstructs some of the improvements in the field of Comparative Constitutional Law. Using recent literature, it starts with a definition of the state of art of the subject in Brazil. A warning against the predominance of perspectives that privilege the global north. The relationship between comparativism and judicialization indicates the reasons of the rebirth of the subject through a stronger activity of judges and tribunals. Themes with methodological approach, like the difference between small-N and large-N analyses, adequate metaphors, comparative segmentation and the call for transdisciplinarity, are discussed with the aim of driving the debate. The literature review method is enriched with the checking of two examples of mistaken comparativism using: Justice Rosa Weber opinion in the Habeas Corpus 152.752 and the debate on snipers. The research results indicate the necessity of rethinking the way Comparative Constitutional Law is used in Brazil.
Keywords:
Comparative Constitutional Law; comparativism; transdisciplinarity; judicialization; Supreme Court