Abstract

This paper deals with one of the most important issues of philosophy of law and constitutional thought: how to understand clashes of fundamental rights, such as the conflict between free speech and privacy. The main argument of this paper is that fundamental rights may clash in such a way that no rational solution can be advanced. I call these conflicts 'constitutional dilemmas.' However, we should not despair: when we define precisely what amounts to a genuine conflict of fundamental rights, most of the cases will appear to be spurious conflicts, which can be rationally dealt with.