美国种族隔离案件裁决与宪法解释方法  

The Decisions of Racial Segregation Cases in U.S. and the Methods of Constitutional Interpretation

作　　者：胡玉桃[1] 

机构地区：[1]北京大学法学院,北京100871

出　　处：《时代法学》2014年第5期108-113,共6页Presentday Law Science

摘　　要：宪法解释是法院依照宪法审理案件、体现对社会动态合宪性评价的重要方式。通过对有关种族隔离案件的裁决,美国最高法院在推翻种族隔离、发展民权运动的历程中扮演着重要角色。本文选取三个典型案例——使"平等隔离"理论合宪化的"普莱西案"、推翻"平等隔离"理论的"布朗第一案"和将"平等保护"条款适用于联邦政府的"特区学校第一案"——阐述原旨主义与非原旨主义的论争以及历史解释和结构解释等宪法解释方法的运用。多种宪法解释方法时常结合使用,在具体案件审理中可能需要综合予以考虑。Constitutional interpretation is an important way the courts use to adjudicate the cases and indicate the evaluation of constitutionality of the social issues. The Supreme Court in U. S. played a significant role in the process of overturning racial segregation and developing civil rights movement through the relevant decisions. This article selects three typical cases to elaborate the de- bate of originalism and non-originalism and the application of several methods of constitutional inter- pretation including historical interpretation and structural interpretation. The first case upheld the constitutionality of ＂equal isolation＂. The second case overturned the theory of ＂equal isolation＂. The third case applied the provision of ＂equal protection＂ to the federal government. Various methods may be used in combination. In the specified cases the court may need to give a comprehensive consideration.

关 键 词：种族隔离 原旨主义 非原旨主义 历史解释 结构解释 

分 类 号：D9712[政治法律—法学]