戴维·斯特劳斯 现任芝加哥大学法学院杰出贡献教授,著名宪法学者,《最高法院评论》编辑,曾担任美国参议院司法委员会特别顾问和美国首席政府律师助理。斯特劳斯教授分别于牛津大学和哈佛大学获得哲学与法律学位。
毕洪海 山东海阳人,本科就读于中国青年政治学院,后于北京大学获法学硕士和博士学位。现任教于北京航空航天大学法学院。学术兴趣领域为行政法、政法理论、法律与公共治理等。
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia once remarked that the theory of an evolving, "living" Constitution effectively "rendered the Constitution useless." He wanted a "dead Constitution," he joked, arguing it must be interpreted as the framers originally understood it. In The Living Constitution, leading constitutional scholar David Strauss forcefully argues against the claims of Scalia, Clarence Thomas, Robert Bork, and other "originalists," explaining in clear, jargon-free English how the Constitution can sensibly evolve, without falling into the anything-goes flexibility caricatured by opponents. The living Constitution is not an out-of-touch liberal theory, Strauss further shows, but a mainstream tradition of American jurisprudence--a common-law approach to the Constitution, rooted in the written document but also based on precedent. Each generation has contributed precedents that guide and confine judicial rulings, yet allow us to meet the demands of today, not force us to follow the commands of the long-dead Founders. Strauss explores how judicial decisions adapted the Constitution's text (and contradicted original intent) to produce some of our most profound accomplishments: the end of racial segregation, the expansion of women's rights, and the freedom of speech. By contrast, originalism suffers from fatal flaws: the impossibility of truly divining original intent, the difficulty of adapting eighteenth-century understandings to the modern world, and the pointlessness of chaining ourselves to decisions made centuries ago. David Strauss is one of our leading authorities on Constitutional law--one with practical knowledge as well, having served as Assistant Solicitor General of the United States and argued eighteen cases before the United States Supreme Court. Now he offers a profound new understanding of how the Constitution can remain vital to life in the twenty-first century.
《美利坚合众国宪法》可能是世界上最短的宪法之一了,仅仅用了4543个词语。即使将修正案算上,我猜语词也不足一万。但如果这样就认为,宪法学就是美国法学界最简单的学科,那就大错特错了。关于宪法的论争比其他任何一门学科都要激烈、复杂,随手翻开各大法律评论,几乎每一期...
评分《美利坚合众国宪法》可能是世界上最短的宪法之一了,仅仅用了4543个词语。即使将修正案算上,我猜语词也不足一万。但如果这样就认为,宪法学就是美国法学界最简单的学科,那就大错特错了。关于宪法的论争比其他任何一门学科都要激烈、复杂,随手翻开各大法律评论,几乎每一期...
评分《美利坚合众国宪法》可能是世界上最短的宪法之一了,仅仅用了4543个词语。即使将修正案算上,我猜语词也不足一万。但如果这样就认为,宪法学就是美国法学界最简单的学科,那就大错特错了。关于宪法的论争比其他任何一门学科都要激烈、复杂,随手翻开各大法律评论,几乎每一期...
评分《美利坚合众国宪法》可能是世界上最短的宪法之一了,仅仅用了4543个词语。即使将修正案算上,我猜语词也不足一万。但如果这样就认为,宪法学就是美国法学界最简单的学科,那就大错特错了。关于宪法的论争比其他任何一门学科都要激烈、复杂,随手翻开各大法律评论,几乎每一期...
评分《美利坚合众国宪法》可能是世界上最短的宪法之一了,仅仅用了4543个词语。即使将修正案算上,我猜语词也不足一万。但如果这样就认为,宪法学就是美国法学界最简单的学科,那就大错特错了。关于宪法的论争比其他任何一门学科都要激烈、复杂,随手翻开各大法律评论,几乎每一期...
FedSoc presents — Halloween party: the living constitution
评分反原旨主义是没啥问题,但要把living constitution说清楚就不那么容易了
评分FedSoc presents — Halloween party: the living constitution
评分反原旨主义是没啥问题,但要把living constitution说清楚就不那么容易了
评分反原旨主义是没啥问题,但要把living constitution说清楚就不那么容易了
本站所有内容均为互联网搜索引擎提供的公开搜索信息,本站不存储任何数据与内容,任何内容与数据均与本站无关,如有需要请联系相关搜索引擎包括但不限于百度,google,bing,sogou 等
© 2025 book.wenda123.org All Rights Reserved. 图书目录大全 版权所有