Supermajority law has been implemented by more than fifty countries around the world; nevertheless, the broad comparative perspectives of this widespread legal concept have been explored by constitutional scholarship in a very limited manner. This chapter attempts to address this gap by providing a comparative insight into the various models of supermajority law around the world. All countries operating with this constitutional instrument have been involved in the analysis; however, the intensity of dogmatic debates on the matter and the availability of relevant sources gave primary weight to France, Spain, and Hungary. The chapter begins with the historical points of reference: the constitutional development of the Third French Republic meant a direct predecessor of current French organic laws. The three main waves of spreading supermajority law around the world have also been distinguished. Firstly, France introduced organic laws into the Constitution of the Fifth Republic in 1958, which was followed by a number of Francophone African countries. Secondly, one and a half decades later, the democratic Constitution of Spain also implemented organic law, which later appeared in a number of Latin American constitutions. Thirdly, the Central European democratic transition after the fall of the communist dictatorship again gave birth to various supermajority law concepts around the region. The chapter illustrates the multiple models of defining legal rank, procedural rules, and the scope of supermajority law, and also highlights the partly intentional, partly incidental migration of a constitutional idea. The comparison helps to classify supermajority law models based on the applicable level of parliamentary majority and further safeguards; the method of determining its legal rank; and the potential inclusion of institutional matters, fundamental rights, and/or public policy issues among the supermajority legislative fields.