Translating Justice: The International Organization of Constitutional Courts

What is the international organization of national constitutional courts? This article develops a theoretical framework to analyze this question and tests it empirically with original data of translated opinions. Justices of different nations form an emerging epistemic community, which is congealed due to common practices as well as to competition and selectiveness throughout the judicial career. Opinions translated into English as the lingua franca are pivotal for communication within this epistemic community. Through engaging in a transnational judicial dialogue, and particularly as far as this dialogue concerns legal citations, this community uses international law as a key guide to finding equilibrium solutions at national and international levels. Five sources of international law overwhelmingly dominate. In addition, we find evidence in the collegial game within the different courts for the existence of a transnational epistemic community of Supreme Court justices.     

Measuring Precedent in a Judicial Hierarchy

Identifying the U.S. Supreme Court's most influential precedents is integral to understanding its impact on society. To make these identifications, scholars often analyze the network of citations in Supreme Court opinions. I contend that the broader jurisprudential significance of precedent can be better captured by considering how frequently a precedent is followed across the federal judicial hierarchy. In support of this contention, I present an analysis of original data on the treatment of every Court precedent 1946–2010 in all three levels of the federal judicial hierarchy. I show that a class of complex and ambiguous precedents are followed significantly less at all levels of the hierarchy. Yet these same fractious precedents exhibit high citation rates in Supreme Court opinions. The results show that different methodological choices capture strikingly different theoretical concepts, ones that are easily conflated in the study of legal precedent.     

The Influence of Personal Values on Legal Judgments

The non‐legal factors that influence judicial decisions have been the subject of extensive debate. Theoretical and empirical work has focused on factors including political ideology, activism, attitudes, and demographics. Personal values are related to these factors and are central to decision making. The study described in this article translated theories and techniques from psychological research to examine the role of personal values in judicial decision making. A novel method of assessment of value expression in legal opinions revealed a different pattern of values expressed in the majority and minority opinions of a case that divided the Supreme Court. An empirical study of legal academics extended this analysis and highlighted the significant influence of personal values on legal decisions. The value:decision paradigm provides a new framework to analyse judicial decision making, judicial division, and judicial discretion and has significant implications for judicial diversity.     

再论司法鉴定基本问题--兼评《关于民事诉讼证据的若干规定》有关条款

最高法民事证据规定对于完善我国证据体系具有重要意义。此次证据规定,对作为证据体系重要一环的鉴定意见,从实体和程序方面都做了全面规定,对于缓解司法鉴定在民事诉讼中的诸多困境具有重要作用。但其中部分条款也可能对司法鉴定制度产生一定影响。为此,本文对司法鉴定可能会受到一定冲击的鉴定人负责制、鉴定意见撤销等基本内容,再次予以阐释、厘定,以期能确保司法鉴定体系的有效运行。     

What Determines Judicial Prestige? An Empirical Analysis for Judges of the Federal Court of Australia

This article examines judicial citations to analyze the determinantsof judicial prestige in the Federal Court of Australia. Firstwe construct two alternative measures of judicial prestige forall current and retired judges of the Federal Court. Second,we regress these measures of judicial prestige on a series ofexplanatory variables covering age on appointment, appointinggovernment, prior experience, which law school the judge attended,how many law review articles the judge has published, gender,and tenure. We compare our results with those of previous studiesthat examine the determinants of judicial influence and prestigein courts in the United States and the High Court of Australia.One of the main contributions of the article is to provide evidencefrom an intermediate appellate court that can be used to testthe general application of findings as to what determines judicialprestige in the United States to courts in other countries withdifferent institutional frameworks.     

“舆情再审”:司法决策的困境与出路

李昌奎案件作为"舆情再审"的典型样本,引发我们对司法决策中舆情风险的思考。在形式合理性法治中,司法与以社会舆论为载体的民意冲突不可避免。在中国社会转型期的构建型法治推进中,死刑案件的司法决策便是舆情风险的高发地带。由于司法权威尚未牢固树立,中国司法机关的舆情风险承受能力较弱。化解司法决策中的舆情风险的根本出路在于树立司法权威,而在当下,为实现对已有司法权威的存量保护,强化司法与社会诉讼过程中的沟通机制,尤为重要。     

科学证据的基本特征——兼谈法医学鉴定意见的审查

本文论述了科学证据应具备的基本特征。旨在帮助法官正确认识司法鉴定的本质,审查司法鉴定意见(或结论)的方法,以及法医学鉴定意见(或结论)可采信的条件。而对于司法鉴定人来说,正确认识司法鉴定意见(或结论)作为科学证据所应具备的基本特征,或作为科学证据被采信所应具备的基本条件,是做好司法鉴定工作的前提。     

裁判文书援引学说的基本原理与规则建构

学说的内容实质正当性及其约束法官自由裁量空间的外观进而增强裁判可接受性的功能,是裁判文书援引学说的基本原理,也是建构援引规则的出发点。学说根据其竞争力可以分为通说、主流说、少数说,法官既可以援引通说也可以援引非通说;援引非通说应当成为援引的主流。法官在援引学说时应尽量采用对话技术,尤其是在援引通说时应尽量避免对学说进行大篇幅的“复制与粘贴”;应尽量援引不同体裁的代表性作品以体现学说的数量优势外观。学者姓名承担了标识学术产品的质量担保功能、“商誉”功能与司法修辞功能,学说出处具有定位学者学说发展脉络等功能,援引学说须注明姓名与出处。裁判文书援引学术作品实质上是法官“购买”学术产品的行为,它将刺激处于供给侧的学者主动生产实务所需的产品,继而促成学术与实务的良性互动。最高人民法院可以考虑出台有关裁判文书援引学说的具体规则指引。     

PROFESSIONAL PERSPECTIVES ON COURT-CONNECTED CHILD CUSTODY MEDIATION

This article presents the initial findings of a research project in five judicial settings where there is the provision of child custody mediation within the court. A sample of judges, members of the Bar, and court mediators completed the Professional Study Questionnaire, which examined opinions regarding the efficacy of child custody mediation and requested suggestions for judicial policy and procedure in cases of custody conflicts.     

唐宋“四等官”审判制度初探

唐宋审判机关的内部司法官按其权限和职掌可分为四等 :长官、通判官、判官、主典。他们在判案过程中 ,既各司其职、连署文案 ,又相互牵掣、承担连带责任。这既是一项基本的审判制度 ,又是同一审级中的内部监督机制 ,对明清的法制产生了积极的影响     

浅析网络舆论与司法审判的关系

网络舆论作为司法审判的一种重要监督手段,在很大程度上对司法审判起着重要的促进作用,与此同时,网络舆论也因其各方面的特点表现出对司法审判强大的攻击力和影响力,甚至形成"舆论审判",并有愈演愈烈之势。面对如此严峻的"司法困境",从网络舆论的几个方面进行研究,侧重分析其与司法审判的内在机理。力争通过对网络舆论的"聆听",把握二者本质规律,进一步思考能够促进司法审判的各方面因素,力求实现二者的良性协调。     

“法庭之友”制度的基础与运行机制——以吴英案为中心的分析

"法庭之友"制度的构建、运行及其功能发挥需要司法的独立与权威、有赖于良好的舆论环境和成熟的社会组织的支撑。在民众广泛参与、理性发表法律意见的前提下,出现了社会精英主导舆论走向、主流意见趋于统一、舆论表现出更强的社会责任感的发展趋势,这就为"法庭之友"制度的建构提供了舆论结构基础。"法庭之友"制度有助于疏通政治渠道、凝聚民意、弥补法官知识的缺陷、分担法院责任、推动法律发展,因而具有促进司法的法律效果和社会效果有机统一的制度功能。"法庭之友"制度功能的发挥,在很大程度上有赖于法院通过尊重、评价、吸纳机制所给予的司法支持。"法庭之友"制度在凝练主流民意、优化舆论环境、构建信任基础和消解政治压力方面对我国司法制度的改革与完善具有重要的借鉴意义。我们应该在借鉴国外有益经验的基础上,结合我国的司法国情,合理定位"法庭之友"的功能、框定适用范围、界定合适主体、构筑严密正当的程序,建构中国特色的"法庭之友"制度。     

SUPERVISED ACCESS

This article addresses the question of whether long-term supervised access is an appropriate solution when unsupervised access is unlikely to become possible in the future. The article assesses judicial decisions and theoretical commentary on this issue in light of the opinions and practices of service providers and in light of the best interest of the child standard. The opinions and practices of service providers were gleaned from published materials and from interviews with service providers at supervised access facilities in Vermont and New Hampshire and in Ontario, Canada. The supervised access facilities surveyed for this research were diverse in their practices and experiences but remarkably similar in their approach to long-term supervised access. Outside the scope of the research for this article was the question of whether the opinions and practices of the service providers at the facilities surveyed are representative, and this question requires further investigation .     

Power,National Security and Transparency: Judicial Decision Making and Social Architecture in the Federal Courts

Even in a democratic society, the need for transparency must be balanced with an important countervailing interest: the occasional, legitimate need for government secrecy. This article, based on an examination of opinions in federal cases dealing with national security and transparency, explores how judges identified the main legal issues presented by a case and the legal factors or mode of legal interpretation used to reach or justify their conclusions. The article concludes that many of these opinions are as much about judges’ attempts to balance the judicial branch's power with the powers of the executive and legislative branches as they are about national security and transparency. Furthermore, the article contends these opinions have created an “architecture of power” that determines how national security information is controlled. The final section also suggests that judges should be mindful of the original architecture of power established by the Constitution and the First Amendment when writing their opinions.     

GOVERNING STANDARDS OF MEDICAL CARE: State Courts Interpret the Locality Rule

This article analyzes a significant, but little researched, form of legal involvement in the medical profession—state appellate court opinions. Analyzing 100 years of state appellate court decisions on a legal rule called the "locality rule," the author presents four distinct judicial interpretations of the rule. Each has distinctive policy implications for law and medicine pertaining to the setting of standards for professional competency in medicine. Three of the judicial interpretations provide for increasing amounts of judicial deference to the professional autonomy of the medical community. A fourth interpretation within the last decade, however, upholds a judicial prerogative for establishing standards of professional competency. The author concludes that the fourth interpretation is not an aberration and signals a change in the relationship between law and medicine for the future.     

论刑事诉讼中的精神疾病司法鉴定

刑事诉讼中的精神疾病司法鉴定通常在＂有鉴定必要时＂启动,精神疾病司法鉴定人出席庭审,鉴定意见在法庭上接受质证,但是法官并不完全受制于鉴定意见。我国刑事诉讼中精神疾病司法鉴定属于职权型启动,当事人的相关权利保障不足,精神疾病司法鉴定的意见难以在庭审时接受充分质证,对精神疾病司法鉴定意见的采信缺乏统一的规则。应当加强我国司法机关运用职权启动精神疾病司法鉴定的义务,鉴定人原则上应当出庭,并规范法官对精神疾病司法鉴定意见的采信。     

论刑事司法实践中的民意影响

本文结合典型案例从刑事司法实践中的案件事实认定、法律适用以及裁判执行三个方面,详细探讨民意的影响,并剖析其中原因,认为民意的感性化和情绪化并不一定构成司法警惕民意的理由。但是为了维护法律的权威、促进司法的公平正义,司法绝不能仅仅为了获取社会公众的认同而盲目顺从民意,必须始终坚持法律至上原则,与民意保持适当距离,对民意的考量只能在法官的自由裁量权范围内进行。     

卫生行政解释的若干问题

卫生行政解释对执法人员准确理解卫生法律规范，实现卫生行政管理目的具有重要作用。在对卫生行政解释作理论分析的基础上，对执法实践中遇到的行政解释的效力问题，与立法解释、司法解释的关系及在行政法律文书中引用等几个问题作了初步探讨。     

妨害疫情防控行为的刑法适用之体系解释

国家司法机关制定发布的妨害疫情防控刑事司法意见是一种刑法适用性解释,与规范性司法解释相比,其具有间接的法律适用效力。从刑法体系解释角度看,有关妨害疫情防控的刑法规范、司法解释与司法意见应当是相互协调的。对刑事司法意见的适用进行解释应当遵循整体性、动态性、协调性原则,并运用同类解释规则、同一解释规则、排他解释规则,对以危险方法危害公共安全罪、妨害传染病防治罪、妨害公务罪等相关罪名进行适用性解释,实现严格依法从重处罚和宽严相济。     

When “Best Practices” Win,Employees Lose: Symbolic Compliance and Judicial Inference in Federal Equal Employment Opportunity Cases

This article provides a new account of employers' advantages over employees in federal employment discrimination cases. We analyze the effects of judicial deference, in which judges use institutionalized employment structures to infer nondiscrimination without scrutinizing those structures in any meaningful way. Using logistic regression to analyze a representative sample of judicial opinions in federal EEO cases during the first thirty‐five years after the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, we find that when judges uncritically use the presence of organizational structures to reason about whether discrimination occurred, employers are much more likely to prevail. This pattern is especially pronounced in opinions written by liberal judges. In light of these findings, we offer recommendations for judges, lawyers, and policy makers—including legal academics—who seek to improve the accuracy and efficacy of employment discrimination adjudications.