反思“母法论”宪法观——以美国法中雇员言论的公私之别为例  

Rethinking the Idea of Constitution as“Parent Law”:Analysis of Public/private Distinction of Workplace Speech in US as an Example

作　　者：姜峰 Jiang Feng

机构地区：[1]华东师范大学法学院

出　　处：《苏州大学学报（法学版）》2022年第4期27-35,共9页Journal of Soochow University：Law Edition

摘　　要：我国学界坚持的“母法论”的宪法观,在理解基本权利时忽略了法律关系因素的意义,其特征可以与他国经验做比较性反思。劳动关系中的雇员言论是否属于宪法言论自由的具体化,是一个具有典型意义的比较领域。公、私之别是理解美国雇员言论问题的一把钥匙,它包括两个方面:一是区分主体的公私——公共雇员和私人雇员;二是区分内容的公私——公共言论与私人言论。美国法对言论的保护是按照法律关系来区分的,依据主体和内容的不同设定权利和义务,而不认为宪法言论自由对部门法有一般性的约束效力,部门法对雇员言论的保护也并非宪法权利的具体化。这种理解方式与我国的“母法论”宪法观形成了鲜明的对照。The idea of Constitution as parent law of ordinary laws is popularly accepted by Chinese scholars.However,this idea overlooks the constructive value of relationship factor in forming the normative meaning of a constitutional or legal right.The goal of this article is to explore the relation between constitution and ordinary laws by taking workplace speech in the United States as the sample.The public/private distinction is the key to understand the legal status of employee speech in the U.S.This may include two aspects:Firstly,there is a distinction between public employee and private employee;the former may be protected by constitution while the latter may not;Secondly,the content of speech may be divided into public and private.Speech may be protected differently under the American law due to what legal relations which the speech is belong to.This distinction model is totally different from the parent-children model which is the main-steam view among the Chinese academics.

关 键 词：宪法 部门法 雇员言论 言论自由 

分 类 号：D911[政治法律—宪法学与行政法学]