This book is simultaneously an account of the development of European Union human rights law over recent decades, and a work of comparative federalism. Focusing on the multi-level systems of human rights protection in the EU and in the US, and on the interaction between the federal and the state levels, the author examines the dynamics at play in the emergence over time of standards of human rights protection in Europe. He suggests that problems of ineffectiveness in standards of protection may arise when the ‘federal’ level sets a ceiling in relation to a particular right, and that problems of inconsistency may arise where the federal level merely sets a floor, leaving individual states to develop their own standards. He suggests that a look at the practice of the United States, particularly in relation to the interaction between the state and federal levels, can be instructive for the EU going forward, particularly as its human rights system grows more complex with the accession of the EU to the European Convention on Human Rights. Drawing on what the author terms a ‘neo-federalist narrative’, the substance of the book is built around four interesting comparative case studies, involving civil and political as well as socio-economic rights. The first is a study of due process standards for suspected terrorists, the second the right to vote for non-citizens, the third the right to strike, and the fourth the right to abortion. This is a lively and readable work which sheds interesting light on the development of human rights standards in the European Union, focusing on the interplay between national, EU, and ECHR standards, and comparing these to relevantly similar developments in the United States. It should be of considerable interest to students and scholars of EU law, European human rights law, and comparative federalism.