查詢結果分析
來源資料
相關文獻
- 美國法院與公共政策
- 論司法機關與公共政策
- Interest Groups and Judicial Process in the United States
- The Study of Courts Influence on Public Policy: Focus on the Racial Policy in the United States
- 論德國「政府行為」理論與「不受法院管轄之高權行為」概念
- 立院新結構與議程設定
- 美國聯邦最高法院之司法審查權
- 多數統治與少數權利之調和:美國聯邦最高法院司法審查權之民主基礎
- 轉型法院與法治主義:論最高行政法院對違法行政命令審查的積極趨勢
- 政府採購法修法後之問題探討--以九十一年二月修頒版本為核心
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | 美國法院與公共政策=Courts and Public Policies in the United States |
---|---|
作 者 | 蘇俊斌; | 書刊名 | 空大行政學報 |
卷 期 | 10 2000.06[民89.06] |
頁 次 | 頁231-247 |
分類號 | 572.9 |
關鍵詞 | 法院; 公共政策; 司法審查; 利益團體; Courts; Public policy; Judicial review; Interest group; |
語 文 | 中文(Chinese) |
中文摘要 | 法官是否能夠制定美國的公共政策?何時制定,如何制定。對於學者、社會評論家、公務人員而言,的確是項重要且爭論的議題。最基本的反對主張認為司法的政策制定是在不民主的程序中產生。因為如憲法設計般,民主的機能是讓人民靠著選舉領導者來決定公共政策,並使其為之負責。然而民選的部門卻往往只會回應具有組織及富裕階層的勢力。所以為了保障政治弱勢及未有組織或貧困的團體之權利與利益,在作成司法決定時,法官將無法避免的調整公共政策,因為彼等將需告訴民選官員何者當為,何者不當為。所以美國憲法上的民主可以定義成公民對公共政策的控制再加上對個人權利的保障。 |
英文摘要 | Should judges makes public policy decision for the United States. When they do,and how they do. There are the important and controversial questions among scholars,social commentators and public officials. The primary argument against judicial policymaking is that it produces public policy in an undemocratic manner. As designed in theconstitution, the democracy creates mechanism for the people to determine public policyby electing leaders and holding them accountable for their action. But the electedbranches of government are structured to respond to well-organized and affluent interests.In order to protect the rights and interests of weak political minorities and unorganized orpoor groups. In making judicial decisions, judges will inevitably shape public policybecause they will be telling elected officials what those officials must or cannot do.Thus. the American Constitutional democracy can be defined as citizen control overpublic policy plus the protection of individuals' rights. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。