This volume explicitly connects the on-going Methodology Debate within Legal Philosophy to constitutional adjudication in charter systems. By drawing out the implications of this debate and the challenge of giving a proper account of constitutional adjudication in a general theory of law, the study shows how a descriptive, morally and politically neutral legal theory can deal with epistemic uncertainty in a thoroughgoing manner. It also demonstrates the merits of a minimalist version of Legal Positivism with regard to the practical importance of charters in charter systems and societies. The book crosses the usual boundaries of abstract legal theory to consider actual charter systems and cases in constitutional adjudication, thus showing the worth of careful reflection on methodological and meta-theoretical issues for a comprehensive and clearly applicable account of those present-day legal systems which are fast becoming the norm.