美国反垄断法适用除外制度发展趋势探析

美国反垄断法适用除外制度 ,除劳动争议与集体协议适用除外的范围有所扩大以外 ,其他适用除外制度如保险业适用除外、州行为适用除外、请愿行为适用除外、体育运动适用除外都趋向于严厉     

论政府信息公开排除范围的界定

在政府信息公开实践中,排除公开的范围应如何界定,成为整个信息公开法制的关键。为防止排除范围被行政主体滥用,国家秘密、商业秘密、个人隐私以及其它排除公开的范围应得到妥善界定。分析以上排除公开的范围,对国家秘密、商业秘密等概念的内涵进行适度收缩,同时要建立价值衡量的原则、明确排除范围的具体子类型、采用梯次化的概念内涵构造以及保证必要的监督空间等,为实现信息公开的价值而策略性地调整信息公开的排除范围。     

侵权责任免责事由类型体系的建构

类型是法律理念与生活事实的中间点。类型思维的特点在于中度抽象性,即相对于抽象的概念思维,类型思维更多的保留了事物的个别特征。免责事由的类型集合性特征,决定了在对其加以体系化建构和整理的过程中,类型化是最为适合的研究方法。设定合理的免责事由类型,构建免责事由类型系列都是类型思维研究方法的体现。     

Religious Freedom and Religious Antidiscrimination

This article develops a theoretical framework that prompts a new understanding of the role of religious freedom and religious antidiscrimination in human rights law. Proceeding from the prevailing theoretical and doctrinal uncertainty over the relationship between the two rights, which are currently seen as either synonymous or as distinct and in competition, the article develops an account of the moral right to ethical independence and argues that religious freedom and religious antidiscrimination share their main normative basis on that moral right. However, religious freedom and religious antidiscrimination have different emphasis, and both are essential to secure fair background circumstances for the pursuit of different individual plans of life. The proposed framework illuminates the relationship of individual and collective aspects of religious freedom with discrimination law. The analysis has crucial implications for human rights interpretation in cases involving state interference with liberty, in relation to religion or belief, and more broadly.     

Conscientious objection and equality laws: Why the content of the conscience matters

Law and Philosophy - By enacting equality laws the liberal state decides the limits of liberal tolerance by relying on content-based rather than content-neutral considerations. Equality laws are...     

Conscientious objection in reproductive health care: Analysis of Pichon and Sajous v. France

This article explores the issue of conscientious objection invoked by health professionals in the reproductive and sexual health care context and its impact on women's ability to access health services. The right to exercise conscientious objection has been recognized by many international and European scholars as being derived from the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. It is not, however, an absolute right. When the exercise of conscientious objection conflicts with other human rights and fundamental freedoms, a balance must be struck between the right to conscientious objection and other affected rights such as the right to respect for private life, the right to equality and non-discrimination, and the right to receive and impart information. Particularly in the reproductive health care context, states that allow health professionals to exercise conscientious objection must accommodate this in such a way that its exercise does not compromise women's access to health services. This article analyses the European Court of Human Rights' decision on admissibility in Pichon and Sajous v. France (2001) and argues that a balancing approach should be applied in cases of conscientious objection in the sexual and reproductive health care context.     

Religious Characteristics and the Death Penalty

Using one mock trial scenario, this study investigated whether religious and demographic factors were related to death penalty attitudes and sentencing verdicts. Those who favored the death penalty differed from those who had doubts about the penalty in gender, affiliation, fundamentalism, evangelism, literal Biblical interpretism, beliefs about God’s attitudes toward murders, and perceptions of how their religious groups felt about the death penalty. These relationships generally held after mock jurors were death qualified. Gender, fundamentalism, literal interpretism, beliefs about God’s death penalty position, and perceptions of how one’s religious group felt about the death penalty predicted death penalty sentencing verdicts. Future research could determine whether using peremptory challenges to exclude potential jurors based on religion can help lawyers choose a more favorable jury. The present research was supported by the National Science Foundation award number 0351811, the Society for the Psychological Study of Social Issues, the American Psychology-Law Society, and the University of Nebraska Law-Psychology Program. This research was presented at the 2006 conference of the American Psychology-Law Society. The authors are grateful for the research assistance of Nick Fanning and Beth Herschlag and for the helpful comments from Brian Bornstein, Rich Wiener, Bob Schopp, Dick Dienstbier, and several anonymous reviewers.     

On the Utility of Religious Toleration

Brian Leiter’s Why Tolerate Religion? valuably clarifies the issues involved in granting religion-specific accommodations (and thus exceptions or exemptions) to laws and policies of general application. His arguments are careful, rigorous, and fair, and in rejecting the deontological arguments for religion-specific accommodations he seems to me largely correct. But when he turns to arguing against the utilitarian case for such accommodations, he employs a seemingly non-standard sense of utilitarianism in which demands of principled consistency constrain what would otherwise be utilitarian welfare-maximization. A more traditional and stronger version of utilitarianism, however, has room for seemingly unprincipled or even irrational distinctions as long as employing those distinctions is utility- or welfare-maximizing. And thus although Leiter’s arguments against the deontological justifications for religion-specific accommodations are largely successful, his arguments against utilitarian justifications, by relying more heavily on the notion of “principle” than a utilitarian should accept, are open to challenge.     

How Law Thinks of Disobedience: Perceiving and Addressing Desertion and Conscientious Objection in Israeli Military Courts

The study transcends the dichotomy "law in the books"/"law in action" by taking law's knowledge-production mechanisms seriously. It examines how the Israeli military justice system perceives and addresses disobedience toward the mandatory military service duty by deserters and conscientious objectors. Both groups resist the military service ethos but differ in the offenders' demographics and motivations. The findings show how law co-opts the socio-political problems, assimilates them, and transforms them to narrow its framework. The legal system can be cognitively open to external frameworks introduced by powerful and resourceful defendants; it remains, however, normatively closed to alternative rules and perspectives.     

西夏的宗教法

西夏有较为完备的宗教法,且独具特色。西夏法律对佛教、道教加以保护,有严格的管理规定,西夏宗教法律制度对僧人的封号及对僧人道士的赐衣、试经度僧和度牒进行了规定,西夏出现了中国最早的帝师封号,西夏法律还规定了僧人道士所享有的权利及其应承担的义务。