司法审查正当性的证成路径及其评析
发布时间：2018-07-15 07:48
【摘要】：对于美国宪政结构中司法审查与民主的悖论问题,西方学界致力于改造传统多数主义的民主观念并提出相应的宪法解释技术来论证司法审查的正当性,这表现为伊利的程序性民主与司法监督、德沃金的合宪性民主与道德解读、波斯纳的精英式民主与实用主义审判、哈贝马斯的协商式民主与程序主义司法等诸多具有代表性的理论范式。事实上,司法审查的正当性证成不能仅仅依靠重构民主观念的外部论证来实现,还需要依靠法官精湛的判决论证技术的内部路径来提升。这说明司法审查与民主的悖论是宪政结构中构成性的内在矛盾,而司法审查与民主的互动则是宪政具有生命力的内在源泉。
[Abstract]:With regard to the paradox between judicial review and democracy in the constitutional structure of the United States, Western scholars are committed to reforming the democratic concept of traditional majoritarianism and putting forward corresponding constitutional interpretation techniques to demonstrate the legitimacy of judicial review. This is manifested in Erie's procedural democracy and judicial supervision, Dworkin's constitutional democracy and moral interpretation, Posner's elitist democracy and pragmatism, Habermas's deliberative democracy and procedural justice and many other representative theoretical paradigms. In fact, the justification of judicial review can not only depend on the reconstruction of the democratic concept of the external argument to achieve, but also rely on the judge's exquisite judgment to improve the internal path of argumentation technology. This shows that the paradox between judicial review and democracy is the internal contradiction of constitutionalism structure, and the interaction between judicial review and democracy is the inner source of constitutionalism with vitality.
【作者单位】： 南开大学法学院;南开大学周恩来政府管理学院博士后科研流动站;
【基金】：2015年度国家社会科学基金青年项目“结果导向的司法决策研究”(15CFX037) 中国博士后科学基金第58批面上资助项目“法官决策行为模型的构建与应用”(2015M580192)的阶段性研究成果
【分类号】：D971.2;DD916.2
[Abstract]:With regard to the paradox between judicial review and democracy in the constitutional structure of the United States, Western scholars are committed to reforming the democratic concept of traditional majoritarianism and putting forward corresponding constitutional interpretation techniques to demonstrate the legitimacy of judicial review. This is manifested in Erie's procedural democracy and judicial supervision, Dworkin's constitutional democracy and moral interpretation, Posner's elitist democracy and pragmatism, Habermas's deliberative democracy and procedural justice and many other representative theoretical paradigms. In fact, the justification of judicial review can not only depend on the reconstruction of the democratic concept of the external argument to achieve, but also rely on the judge's exquisite judgment to improve the internal path of argumentation technology. This shows that the paradox between judicial review and democracy is the internal contradiction of constitutionalism structure, and the interaction between judicial review and democracy is the inner source of constitutionalism with vitality.
【作者单位】： 南开大学法学院;南开大学周恩来政府管理学院博士后科研流动站;
【基金】：2015年度国家社会科学基金青年项目“结果导向的司法决策研究”(15CFX037) 中国博士后科学基金第58批面上资助项目“法官决策行为模型的构建与应用”(2015M580192)的阶段性研究成果
【分类号】：D971.2;DD916.2
【相似文献】
相关期刊论文 前10条
1 黄琳;;刑事司法中民意的渗透与司法应对[J];法制与社会;2012年16期
2 张文旺;;对司法改革理论与实践中几个问题的思考[J];福建法学;2000年01期
3 季卫东;;中国司法的思维方式及其文化特征[J];法律方法与法律思维;2005年00期
4 高志刚;;论整体性衡平的能动司法——评孔祥俊的《司法理念与裁判方法》[J];法律方法;2008年00期
5 陈贤贵;;克制抑或能动——我国当下应当奉行什么样的司法哲学[J];内蒙古社会科学(汉文版);2009年02期
6 陈贤贵;洪秀娟;;徘徊在克制与能动之间——比较法视野下两种司法哲学观的对抗与抉择[J];甘肃政法学院学报;2009年04期
7 李辉;;对能动司法实践的反思——从陇县“能动主义八四司法模式”谈起[J];东岳论丛;2009年11期
8 华丹阳;;论“民意”对司法的影响[J];法制与社会;2013年02期
9 姜明安;Jia Fe;;深化司法氃制改革,推，
本文编号：2123377
本文链接：https://www.wllwen.com/falvlunwen/falilunwen/2123377.html
