Mob rule=Rights of smaller states/groups trumped by raw majority based on short-term feelings of the moment, with not protections for groups.
As a representative democracy, the U.S. has the Electoral College as such a safeguard.
No one's rights are trampled if one candidate or another wins the majority of votes for president. The Electoral College doesn't protect anyone's rights.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but the guaranteed rights (constitutionally) simply say the Government cannot do X, Y or Z. But the Government can do literally anything else.
The US Constitution say, fundamentally, the Government can only do A, B and C, and cannot step outside of those bounds.
Limitations in my meaning are not simply prohibitions, but functional limitations.
A set of limited, enumerated powers. Not all powerful as long as it does not do X, Y or Z.
This is subtle, but fundamental and, as far as I'm aware, quite unique.
1. Now you're moving the goalposts. You asked for limitations on governments' authorities; we gave you some. Now you ask for a specific kind
of limitation. Stop changing the standards.
2. I don't know enough about these foreign constitutions to say that such a limitation doesn't exist; I would have to do much more research. But you clearly don't know enough to say that they don't exist, either, and should not make such a claim.
3. That "limitation" is meaningless in the modern world, because the states have become so interconnected that damn near everything can reasonably fall under the Commerce Clause. It has, as a result of how economically intertwined the states are, become a "limit" in name only.