The development of a second phase of constitutionalism is evident in Lebanon through the Conseil Constitutionnel. It is the supreme court in Lebanon for actions and acts as a court of individual liberties and rights based on the constitutional laws of the Lebanese Republic. While not active recently, the court has established itself as a strong check on the government. The court is based on the French Conseil Constitutionnel and this paper seeks to argue that the two courts, while being very similar, are not one and the same. The Conseil d’Etat in Lebanon displays key differences from its French counterpart. While a decision of the Conseil Constitutionnel in France will take up no more than a page and will do little to explain its reasoning, the Conseil Constitutionnel in Lebanon spends considerable time in its decisions both explaining its reasoning, dividing its decisions into sections, and attempting to more close resemble the style of decision that appears in common law countries. But there is something else that is truly profound in the decisions made by the Conseil Constitutionnel: they refer to France and French commentary on laws. Interspersed with their writings in Arabic are “jurisprudences” from France. This is unique in the Arab world, but very much like the relationship the U.S. court system has with the United Kingdom. This paper posits that this relationship and dialogue is at once unique, Arab, and European. These overlapping spheres create a dialogue between the court and, ultimately, the Lebanese people.