She, like any other legal liability, is a measure of state coercion, based on legal and public condemnation of the crime and expressed in the setting for offender identified adverse effects. For example, based on the opinion of the Supreme Court about the presence in the actions of the President of a crime may impeaching the President of the Russian Federation. We compare constitutional and legal responsibility to administrative responsibility. The subjects of constitutional and legal responsibility act as individuals and collective entities, administrative – natural and legal persons. Constitutional and legal liability (constitutional tort) is significantly different from other offenses (torts) – administrative, disciplinary, civil law.
However, the constitutional and legal liability can be not only inconsistent with the norms of constitutional law behavior, but also the occurrence of other circumstances as expressly provided constitutional and legal norms. Provided for constitutional torts measure of constitutional and legal responsibility (constitutional and legal sanctions) do not coincide with the punishments for crimes and administrative penalties prescribed for administrative violations. Thus, deprivation of rights allows both professional and administrative and constitutional law (though only basic). However, in some cases the imposition of professional or administrative sanctions can not be due to various constitutional and legal immunities (which have, for example, the head of state and parliamentarians). It is known that monetary penalties (fines) are quite common measure of administrative responsibility. However, such a measure can not be attributed to major constitutional and legal sanctions, moreover, its absence indicates that legislator did not consider the penalty effective kind of constitutional and legal sanctions.