Annotation

Methodological issues in law consistently remain among the most complex and controversial. In their search for answers to questions arising in this area, modern researchers, while at best relegating classical methodology to the role of a minimal theoretical foundation, increasingly rely on foreign concepts that intersect psychology, linguistics, semiotics, rhetoric, and jurisprudence, using these concepts to analyze legal phenomena, including the practice of constitutional justice. However, ignoring the traditional methodology that underlies domestic legal scholarship and the Russian legislative system, and perceiving established methods in Russian legal scholarship as outdated, only highlights the vulnerability and incompleteness of modern analytical paradigms. As a study of the practice of the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation demonstrates, dialectical, historical, comparative, sociological, systemic, formal-logical methods, as well as modeling, experimentation, and media content analysis, remain in demand and are actively used in the administration of constitutional justice. Their understanding and correct application are of great importance both for legal science and for constitutional justice itself.