методы конституционной интерпретации, судебное правотворчество, интерпретивизм, судейское самоограничение, текстуализм, судебный активизм, доктрина прецедента, Law

Trying situation in U.S law system characterized of searching responsibility of U.S. Supreme Court for modern signs of crisis. The role of interpretation strengthening continuously and are research’s object. The value of this theme is in investigation of U.S. Supreme Court judicial review too. In this article author are considered interpretation as a function but not official power in accordance with text of U.S. Constitution. Practice and court opinions also investigated. Author of this article researches normative basis for interpretation: constitutional principles and other constitutional text, with amendments, constitutional precedents, and sources out of law (moral, policy, economic etc.) In the 20-th century interpretation function always provided development of American law and accommodation to new social and economic conditions too as first method. Now “extualism” and “originalism” and “judicial restraints” as main interpretivism conceptions dominated amidst of current Justices as new method. On the one side the contradiction between the two methods is danger of stability American law. On the other side two different views to interpretation is permanent long-term attribute. To speak more generally and in accordance the author’s opinion to review and change the results of historic interpretation is impossible.