冲突还是一致:美国民主与司法审查的关系研究  

Conflicting or Consistent: Research on American Democracy and Judicial Review

作　　者：雷安军[1] 

机构地区：[1]宜宾学院,宜宾644000

出　　处：《电子科技大学学报（社科版）》2013年第2期48-52,57,共6页Journal of University of Electronic Science and Technology of China(Social Sciences Edition)

基　　金：作者所主持的教育部人文社会科学研究项目"比较法研究中功能主义原则的缺陷及其克服"的资助(10XJC820002)

摘　　要：美国司法审查具有"反民主"的特征,因而受到了来自民主的质疑。司法审查审查制度的正当性成为争论的焦点。这些争论要么集中在司法审查的内部正当性,关注法官如何作出客观的宪法解释而在民主社会中具有正当性;要么集中在司法审查的外部正当性,关注司法审查如何在民主社会中被接纳。这些争议都预设了民主的前提,但论者却未能弄清美国民主的含义。美国民主是宪政民主,是一种有限民主。司法审查对民主的限制符合美国的宪政精神。从美国宪政的角度来看,司法审查与民主在维持宪政上是一致的。Judicial review in America is criticized because of its anti-democracy characteristic, which receives arguments from the democracy. These arguments mainly focus either on the inner legitimacy and how judges explain the Constitution objectively, or on the outer legitimacy and how people accept judicial review in a democratic society. These arguments assume the precondition of democracy but fail to understand the meaning of America democracy. America democracy is a constitutional and restricted democracy. The fact that judicial review has restricted the democracy is consistent with the spirit of America constitutional system. Thus from the perspective of American＇ constitutional system, judicial review is consistent with democracy in sustaining constitutional system.

关 键 词：冲突 一致 美国民主 司法审查 

分 类 号：D926[政治法律—法学]