制度变革的法律论证:先例推翻的启示——基于美国最高法院2018年两个判例的研究  

Legal Argumentation of Institutional Change: Enlightenment from the Overthrow of Precedents——Research Based on Two Cases of the Supreme Court of the United States in 2018

作　　者：李友根[1] LI You-gen(Law School,Nanjing University,Nanjing 210093,China)

机构地区：[1]南京大学法学院,南京210093

出　　处：《天津法学》2019年第1期5-11,共7页Tianjin Legal Science

基　　金：国家社科基金项目"基于反不正当竞争法修订的案例类型化研究"的阶段性成果;项目编号:16BFX122

摘　　要：分析先例推翻与制度变革之间的关系,探讨推翻先例的论证能否用于分析制度变革的正当性,解读美国最高法院2018年6月判决的Janus案和Wayfair案,从制度变革的角度总结美国法院论证推翻先例的正当性理由,借鉴上述先例推翻的论证,尝试分析制度变革的正当性理由。法院意见对于推翻先例进行了全面的论证,提出了先例论证质量、先例确立规则的实际可行性、先例与其他相关判例的一致性、先例确立后的发展、对该先例的信赖利益五个考虑因素。虽然先例推翻与制度变革具有很大的区别,但其论证框架与具体理由值得借鉴,在制度变革正当性、合理性论证方面具有一定的启示意义。The author analyses the relationship between overthrow of precedents and institutional change,and explores whether the demonstration of overthrow of precedents can be used to analyze the legitimacy of institutional change.Interpreting the Janus and Wayfair cases decided by the Supreme Court of the United States in June 2018,the author summarizes the justification of overthrowing precedents from the perspective of institutional change,and tries to analyze the justification of institutional change by referring to the above-mentioned overthrowing precedents.The opinions of the court comprehensively demonstrated the overthrow of precedents,and the court put forward five considerations,namely,the quality of precedent demonstration,the practical workability of precedent establishment rules,the consistency of precedents with other relevant precedents,the development after the establishment of precedents,and the trust interests of the precedent.Although the overthrow of precedents is quite different from the institutional reforms,its argumentation framework and specific reasons are worth learning,which has certain enlightenment significance in the justification and rationality of institutional reforms.

关 键 词：制度变革 先例推翻 信赖利益 

分 类 号：D912.294[政治法律—民商法学]