A book discussion with author Jeffrey Rosen inspired the following thoughts at a Georgetown Law Recent Books in Constitutional Law Seminar chaired by the originalist oracle, Prof. Randy Barnett.

Rosen’s most recent book The Pursuit of Happiness looks at philosophical works that most influenced the Founders and thus the creation of the constitutional arrangements of the United States of America.

A lot of issues arose during the talks that allow for some comparative parallels to be drawn with the Hungarian constitution and its provisions that are – as it turns out – affected by the same influences and trains of thought that the American Founders were exposed to based on their respective forays into ancient and contemporary moral and political philosophy in different wisdom traditions.

To better grasp the subject of the parallels, a few introductory remarks are in order because – as Anna Conley recently argued in her submission for the 2025 issue of Emory International Law Review:

“Comparative law provides a rich multi-dimensional lens through which to better understand originalism by juxtaposing it with other historical constitutional interpretation methods, identifying its interrelation with politics, culture and rights, and contextualizing its ramifications based on the type of constitution being interpreted.”

1. Firstly, originalist historical inquiry directed at the US Constitution and the circumstances around and influences on its birth date back cca. 300 years in American history. This applies to Hungary with regard to about 30 years of modern, democratic constitutional history, with the new constitution at its point of origin, called the Fundamental Law, which entered into force only in 2012, after being adopted one year earlier. A second layer to the Hungarian historical inquiry, on the other hand, may date back about 1000 years, until the birth of our nation focused on the “achievements of our historical constitution”. (A comparison of these interpretive methods has been summarized by Lee Strang in 2022.)
2. Secondly, we should focus the area of inquiry within the constitutional text. The phrase ‘pursuit of happiness’ is found in the preamble of the Declaration of Independence that could be viewed as the bedrock US Constitution, framing its purpose. Preambles are told be segments in constitutional text that are suitable to express “emotions in constitutional design”, therefore the Hungarian preamble is taken as the second point of reference for our comparison.

In the context of constitutions and happiness, we could also ask the question that beyond the text, are the people happy with the constitution itself?

I have recently had discussions with students and mid-career professionals as part of different speaking engagements in D.C., including a back and forth about the perceived ‘mediocrity’ of the US Constitution argued by one side, while the other supporting the argument that the Constitution’s design is ‘revolutionary’ and only its institutional practice being ‘mediocre’. (Yuval Levin’s most recent book, American Covenant also look at these issues in the context of the unifying nature of the US Constitution.)

Thus, seeking answer(s) to the question whether the people are happy with the constitution that allows them identification with the values expressed by it and thus empowering them to engage with the pursuit of their own happiness is worthwhile.

In European constitutional, political and legal theory, the original but heavily criticized Habermasian strand of Verfassungspatriotismus or constitutional patriotism deals with the issue of analyzing the extent of the identification of the political community subject to the constitution with the history, culture and values represented in the constitutional text, i.e. their happiness with text.

In the United States, the Ackermanian theory of constitutional politics may be mentioned here, focusing on changes in social and public discourse regarding certain core values represented by the Constitution or coming to the surface through its interpretation by the Supreme Court. We have seen many instances in the recent past indicating societal disquietude with certain value choices in constitutional jurisprudence, further analysis of which is omitted herein, in keeping with the original intent of this paper.

When tracing the elements and inferences conducive to the ‘pursuit of happiness’ or happiness itself across the two constitutions, also in light of the readings influencing the thoughts of the Founders, a few key preliminaries apply:

• In order to live a virtuous life, personal self-improvement not only becomes an ‘entitlement’ through the ‘right to the pursuit of happiness’ (as a natural right, rooted in natural law), but it is also construed as an obligation.
• Virtues may not only be interpreted and cultivated in a strictly religious sense or setting, but through other communities as well, as the key to a virtuous and thus happy life is lived through our relationships.
• The government may also have a role in cultivating the people’s virtues and flourishing

Based on these three statements, let’s have a quick look at those Hungarian constitutional provisions that reflect on these. By design, in the Hungarian preamble, there are many emotional and emotive proclamations and statements. Most may be tied to natural law foundations as well as to self-improvement and the pursuit of happiness. These are (verbatim, with emphasis added):

• We hold that human existence is based on human dignity.
• We hold that individual freedom can only be complete in cooperation with others.
• We hold that the family and the nation constitute the principal framework of our coexistence, and that
• our fundamental cohesive values are loyalty, faith and love.
• We hold that the strength of a community and the honour of each person are based on labour and the achievement of the human mind.
• We hold that we have a general duty to help the vulnerable and the poor.
• We hold that the common goal of citizens and the State is to achieve the highest possible measure of well-being, safety, order, justice and liberty.
• We hold that democracy[1] is only possible where the State serves its citizens and handles their affairs in an equitable manner, without abuse and impartially.
• We hold that after the decades of the twentieth century, which led to a state of moral decay, we have an abiding need for spiritual and intellectual renewal.
• We trust in a jointly shaped future and the commitment of younger generations.
• We believe that our children and grandchildren will make Hungary great again with their talent, persistence and moral strength.

These preambular provisions seek to map out all of those principles and values that are conducive to happy life in a happy state. To borrow some familiar turns from the US preamble: “to establish justice”, “to promote the general welfare”, and “to secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and to our posterity” – but also by our posterity, in the Hungarian case.

Another important element of happiness (‘boldogság’ in Hungarian) we may agree is prosperity (‘boldogulás’ in Hungarian), which appears in the constitutional text [Article D) for Diaspora] in the part following the preamble, expanding on the foundational principles underlying the constitutional system with regard to a very specific group: the communities of trans-border Hungarians, living outside of Hungary, and the cooperation between them and Hungary.

This part of the constitutional text [in Article O) for Obligation] also expands on the importance of self-improvement defined as an obligation or duty in so far as it sets forth that “Everyone shall be responsible for him- or herself, and shall be obliged to contribute to the performance of state and community tasks according to his or her abilities and possibilities.” Adding to this, Article XII expands further, by stating “Everyone shall be obliged to contribute to the enrichment of the community through his or her work, in accordance with his or her abilities and potential.”

In a positive reading, these again refer to the importance of communities through which individual freedom flourishes and a duty to impose on ourselves a certain responsibility for self-betterment with a purpose to contribute to society, to work toward the common good.

In only 12 years of hindsight, I would not go as far as to call the 2012 drafters of the Hungarian Fundamental Law ‘Founders’ in the American sense of the expression. However, it is certainly interesting to see that the impressions left by these women and women on the Hungarian constitutional text show a great resemblance to those impressions and elements that the Founders had left on the fabric of the American Constitution and its philosophical and moral underpinning. Albeit, I am sure that many of these impressions have at least two concurring interpretations.

talking about concurring interpretations in the context of constitutional interpretation, there is one last notion relevant to our focus area, which has kept US constitutionalists and political scientists busy arguing ‘across the aisle’ in recent years. The common good, traced all the way back to Roman law, the Antiquity and Greek philosophers, offers another parallel with the Hungarian constitution, as the Fundamental Law contains an interpretive provision prescribing that “it shall be presumed that [the constitutional provisions] serve moral and economic purposes which are in accordance with common sense and the public [i.e. common] good.” (Earlier this year, I published on this subject in Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, so I will not go into any detail herein.)

To sum up: In today’s Europe and across the globe as well, there are many people unhappy with the Hungarian constitutional text, often without taking the time to get to know the exact contextual determinants leading to its adoption – i.e. its design – and the finer details of the most recent cultural, historical, political and institutional reality in which it operates – i.e. its practice.

For those unhappy or disillusioned with the Hungarian situation from ‘across the pond’, the pursuit of their own happiness construed as self-improvement may provide a cure for these ailments if properly applied in the mold given to us by Jeffrey Rosen’ account of the Founders’ routines described in fascinating detail in Pursuit of Happiness. Internalizing these “self-evident truths” and daily practices often may seem as an insurmountable challenge. Thus, it may not always be a happy pursuit. However, preaching the ubiquitous supremacy of the principles and values represented by the American Constitution on a global scale will become much easier through the practice of the Founder’s inward-looking ways of life and self-reflection.

Márton Sulyok JD, LLM, PhD is a Visiting Researcher at the Georgetown Center for the Constitution in Washington D.C. He is also an Asst. Professor (Senior Lecturer) in Constitutional Law and Human Rights at the Institute of Public Law, University of Szeged in Hungary. JD (2007, Szeged), LLM in Anglo-Saxon Law and English Legal Translation (2012, Szeged), PhD in Law and Political Sciences (2017, Szeged). Certified as an American Legal Expert (since 2009) in a joint training program of the University of Toledo (OH, USA) College of Law and the University of Szeged Faculty of Law and Political Sciences. Currently, Prof. Sulyok is the Head of the Public Law Center at Mathias Corvinus Collegium (MCC) in Budapest, Hungary. Previously, he sat on the Management Board of the EU Fundamental Rights Agency (Vienna, 2015-2020), and is now a member of the European Group of Public Law, the Scientific Committee of the EPLO (European Public Law Organization), where he also sits on the Board of Directors.

[1] In the original Hungarian as ’népuralom’ as in ’popular rule’.