Abstract:Under what conditions will two subnational supreme courts diverge fundamentally in their understandings of, and approaches toward, constitutional adjudication, in spite of being invested with identical jurisdictions and overseen by a shared sovereign, within roughly the same time frame? China's two autonomous Special Administrative Regions (SARs), Hong Kong and Macau, possess constitutional frameworks that are nearly the same, yet their paths of judicial review of legislation could not be more different. While the Chinese SARs commonly feature undivided governments returned by rigged electoral systems dominated by the pro-establishment blocs in their respective polities, the Hong Kong Court of Final Appeal has repeatedly nullified unconstitutional acts of the legislature with finality, while the Macau Tribunal de Última Instância has never challenged the validity of legislation at all. This study argues that such divergence can hardly be blamed on the differences between Hong Kong's English common law and Macau's Portuguese civil law heritages. It reveals, with the aid of a theoretical framework that integrates the concept of transaction costs into the strategic model of judicial review, that factional infighting inside, and formidable popular resistance against, Hong Kong's ruling elite have disabled the government to credibly threaten the Court while reinforcing demand for judicial review of unpopular statutes. By contrast, high levels of executive-legislative harmony, minimal popular unrest, and weak pressures to democratize have rendered it very difficult for the Macau Tribunal to defy its government with impunity. Overall, this study contributes to several increasingly important academic fields, including comparative Chinese law, subnational constitutional law, and judicial review in authoritarian polities.INTRODUCTIONI. A STRATEGIC TRANSACTION COST PERSPECTIVE ON JUDICIAL REVIEW UNDER UNIFIED AUTHORITARIAN GOVERNMENTSII. COMPARATIVE EVIDENCE FROM HONG KONG AND MACAUA. OverviewB. Track Record in Reviewing and Invalidating LegislationC. Understandings of the Scope and Extent of the Judicial Power of Concrete ReviewD. Approaches to Abstract Constitutional ReviewIII. ANALYSISA. OverviewB. External ResistanceC. Regime IncoherenceIV. ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATIONSV. CONCLUSION

From liberal to conservative? The role of Hong Kong Court of final appeal in safeguarding fundamental rights under China's One Country Two Systems policy

Unveiling Human Rights Protection in China from the Perspective of Criminal Procedure Law

A sociosemiotic approach to fundamental rights in China

On Hong kong's Judicial Power in a Dual Track Politics

Politicised Legal Discourse And Judicial Accommodation Of Petitioners In Chinese Courts

On the Relation between Construction of People's Congress and Judicial Interpretation of Courts of Hong Kong Special Administrative Region

How Do Chinese Judges Invoke the Constitution? Analysis Based on 1907 Decisions

Chinese Constitutionality in Globalization Era

The Question of 2047: Constitutional Fate of “One Country, Two Systems” in Hong Kong

Approaching the Legitimacy Paradox in Hong Kong: Lessons for Hybrid Regime Courts

The Evolution of Constitutional Adjudication in the Chinese Special Administrative Regions: Theory and Evidence

Citizen Social Right in China:Retrospection,Reality and Suggestion for Policy-making

Legalization of the Chinese Communist Party’s Governance over Hong Kong

Human Rights Lawmaking in China: Domestic Politics, International Law, and International Politics

Interventions In Hong Kong Courts: A Case-Based Study

The Theoretical Prospect in the Age of Rights

The Extradition Bill of Hong Kong revisited, the National Security Law and the irony of human rights protection in “one country, two systems”

Double-Speaking Human Rights: Analyzing Human Rights Conception in Chinese Politics (1989–2015)

Human Rights Protection in the Surrender of Fugitive Offenders between Mainland China, Hong Kong and Macau

China’s human rights foreign policy in the Xi Jinping era: Normative revisionism shrouded in discursive moderation

The Basic Law of the Special Administrative Region of Macau: Some Reflections