Is it so different in practice? Landmark decisions ([0], [1]) set precedent. The conseil constitutionnel has ruled that its precedent is binding [2]. In fact t

Is it so different in practice? Landmark decisions ([0], [1]) set precedent. The conseil constitutionnel has ruled that its precedent is binding [2]. In fact the majority of current constitutionnal law in France was willed into "constitutionnal" status by a landmark decision of the conseil [3]. I mean precdent can move _laws_ to the _constitution_ (see [4]). That seems pretty binding and persuasive. [0] https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grands_arr%C3%AAts_en_droit_administratif_fran%C3%A7ais https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grands_arr%C3%AAts_en_droit_ad... [1] https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grands_arr%C3%AAts_de_la_Cour_de_cassation_(France) https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Grands_arr%C3%AAts_de_la_Cour_... [2] https://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/decision/1962/6218L.htm https://www.conseil-constitutionnel.fr/decision/1962/6218L.h... [3] https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A9cision_Libert%C3%A9_d%27association https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/D%C3%A9cision_Libert%C3%A9_d%2...: essentially, the council ruled that the preamble of the constitution also had constitutional value (which was not the case previously and still is not for laws) - since it also mentions other texts (the preamble of the 1046 Constitution, the 1789 Bill of rights, etc. those texts also have the same legal power as the constitution. [4] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_principles_recognized_by_the_laws_of_the_Republic https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_principles_recogni...