AO1: The US constitution can be used to protect rights as it outlines the key powers of political institutions, and contains a number of amendments specifying rights (including the Bill of Rights); this is not the case in the UK where common law is often used to protect rights AO2: Because the Constitution in the UK is uncodified and unentrenched, it means that political institutions cannot be prevented from infringing rights as effectively as in the US, where powers are outlined in an entrenched Constitution AO1: The US has a Bill of Rights within the Constitution where the UK only has statute law to protect rights AO2: The Bill of Rights in the US is more effective than UK statute law as it is codified and entrenched, whereas UK rights are protected by common law, case law and statute that can be legislated on, repealed or amended, more easily than a formal constitutional amendment in the US, however this does mean that rights in the UK are constantly evolving as new statute is passed e.g. Equality Act 2010 AO1: Interest groups in the US have more access points than in the UK where they may fight to protect rights AO2: The ability to protect rights at a local, state, congressional, presidential and judicial level is more wide-ranging in the US then the UK, and there are fewer limitations on the ability of interest groups to lobby for influence in the US- so protecting rights more effectively AO1: Judicial review in the US can declare an Act that infringes rights unconstitutional, but this is not the case in the UK AO2: The UK Supreme Court can only make a declaration of incompatibility or that an institution has acted ultra vires whereas the ability to declare actions unconstitutional in the US effectively cancels out the law/order/regulation etc AO1: Presidents can use executive orders to protect rights, but this is not an explicit power of prime ministers AO2: Executive orders can and are used to extend or protect rights when it is difficult to achieve consensus in Congress, such as Obama and DACA, but the prime minister is more reliant on Parliament passing legislation, which may be difficult to do, and so rights may be less effectively protected in the UK