外国人在美国担任行政职务的宪法争议--对美国最高法院平等保护案件的考察

发布时间：2018-11-17 09:43

【摘要】：在美国,外国人是否有权担任行政职务是涉及平等保护的宪法议题。美国最高法院不曾否定公民身份与政治忠诚之间的基本联系,但在一定程度上接受了外国人参与公共治理、融入美国社会的诉求。在一部分案件中,最高法院采用严格审查基准,认为州法不应禁止特定外国人担任一般的非选任性行政职务;而在另一部分案件中,最高法院采用合理性审查基准,认为州法可以禁止特定外国人担任选任性行政职务以及重要的非选任性行政职务。此外,较之于州的立法,联邦立法在这一问题上得到了更高程度的司法尊让。然而,最高法院的平等保护分析存在逻辑悖论,有待于进一步完善。一方面,最高法院对于审查基准的选择完全依赖个案衡量,严格审查基准未能得到一贯坚持;另一方面,最高法院对于审查基准的适用具有明显的结果导向,相关司法论证在很大程度上徒具形式意义。
[Abstract]:In the United States, the right of foreigners to executive positions is a constitutional issue of equal protection. The United States Supreme Court did not deny the basic link between citizenship and political loyalty, but to some extent accepted the appeal of foreigners to participate in public governance and integrate into American society. In some cases, the Supreme Court adopted a rigorous review benchmark, holding that state law should not prohibit specific foreigners from holding general non-elective administrative positions; In another part of the cases, the Supreme Court adopted the basis of reasonableness review, holding that state law could prohibit certain foreigners from holding elective administrative positions and important non-elective arbitrary administrative posts. Moreover, federal legislation has gained a higher degree of judicial respect than state legislation. However, there is a logical paradox in the analysis of the equal protection of the Supreme Court, which needs to be further improved. On the one hand, the Supreme Court's choice of the review benchmark is entirely dependent on individual cases, and strict review of the benchmark has not been consistently upheld; On the other hand, the Supreme Court has a clear result-oriented view on the application of the review criteria, and the relevant judicial arguments are, to a large extent, of formal significance.
【作者单位】：四川大学法学院;
【基金】：2016年度四川大学中央高校基本科研业务费研究专项(哲学社会科学)项目区域与国别研究项目“美国宪法解释方法研究——以推进我国实践为导向的考察”(skgb201607) 四川大学美国研究中心2016年度课题国别问题“美国递解出境制度中的外国人权利保障问题研究”(ASC201601)的研究成果
【分类号】：D971.2

【相似文献】