20世纪英美法理学论战中的概念分歧

20世纪50年代以来的英美法理学异常繁荣,各种理论进路纷至沓来。哈特与凯尔森、哈特与富勒、哈特与德沃金、德沃金与菲尼斯、拉兹与菲尼斯、拉兹与科尔曼的争论此起彼伏。他们的法律理论回应了不同的问题并提出了不同类型的概念主张,他们的概念主张具有不同的理论目标。从概念分析的角度看,20世纪英美法理学中的许多论战都是概念分歧,法学家的争论无非是他们的各说各话,许多貌似冲突的主张实际上是相容的。     

美国的法律家长主义理论与实践

在美国法上,法律家长主义是指法律为了当事人自身的利益而限制其自治。在理论上,对法律家长主义争论主要是从法律经济学和法律价值论两个维度进行的,对家长主义式的规定有无效率、法律是否应保持价值中立和自治这一价值在法律中的地位进行探讨。在实践中,法律家长主义在美国合同法、行政法和宪法中有着广泛的应用,对当事人的缔约自由、表达自由、平等权等进行限制,对市场经济和社会保障中的某些行为予以规制。     

“同源分流”与“殊途同归”——英美法律教育发展路向之比较

英国和美国都具有学徒制法律职业教育的传统,但是在本国法律文化和社会实际的影响下,英国和美国的法律教育后来又采取了不同的具体模式。虽然具体形式不同,但英美法律教育都最终走上了学术性与实践性相结合的道路。但是,单就法学院本身而言,英国和美国的法学院法律教育还存在性质、地位和教学等方面的巨大差异。     

“属地原则”与“正当程序”的整合

在美国民事诉讼中,地域管辖规则要求初审法院必须对当事人享有属地上的管辖权,联邦宪法要求初审法院对当事人的这种管辖权必须符合其第十四条修正案中规定的正当程序的要求。在将这两种原则性的管辖规则整合适用方面,美国联邦最高法院作出了若干相关判例。这些判例中的一些思想对于我国地域管辖的完善是有借鉴意义的。     

法学基础理论课程改革的思考与探索

《法学基础理论》课程的设置必须改革,其方向是分别开设两门课程;在一年级开设《法学导论》,在高年级开设《法理学》。前者介绍法和法学的基础知识,后者阐述法的一般原理,包括法治国家的一般理论。     

美国刑法中的重罪谋杀罪规则评析

重罪谋杀罪是英美刑法中比较特殊,并引起很多批评和质疑的罪名。目前,美国大部分州的刑法仍保留有该罪名,但其适用范围和条件受到越来越多的限制,实际上被限于在实施重罪过程中故意或过失造成死亡结果的情形。由于该罪名的设置仍具有一些积极意义且限制了适用范围,尽管存在比较严厉的批评之声,但绝大多数州的刑法仍然保留了重罪谋杀罪规则,短期内没有被废除的迹象。     

论美国检察官的起诉不当

美国检察官在司法实践中存在一些起诉不当的做法,危害极大。美国检察官起诉不当行为的出现原因多元化,其中最为突出的因素有三。目前,美国正积极地推动从三个方面入手来遏止检察官的起诉不当行为。我国也存在一些类似的问题,认真地审视美国的问题可以为中国问题的解决提供一些思路。     

上海文化立法规划和文化法律思想研究

中华人民共和国成立以来,虽然在调整人们的社会文化关系和文化事业管理的一些重要方面,初步做到了有法可依、有章可循,但是,也必须看到,这只是很初步的;长期以来,国家的文化法制建设明显滞后,立法数量偏少,立法层次偏低,是个突出的问题。这离“依法治国”、“实现社会主义法治国家”的基本方略和要求还有一定的距离。离依法有效地、公平地、稳定地促进和调控文化事业和一切文化活动的改革开放要求,还是有相当差距的。就上海乃至全国而言,加快文化立法进程,以逐步形成较为完备的文化法规体系,是十分必要的。在此进程中还必须明确有关的文化法律思想,厘清有关文化发展与文化法制建设中的若干基本关系。     

主题变奏:中国法学在路上——以法理学为视角的观察

文章从不同的视角观察审视了我国法理学的发展,从其主题变奏的十五个方面,比较全面地勾勒了当代中国法学发展的基本面貌.     

论科学发展观与法学方法论的生态化

本文通过厘清法学方法论的历史演变规律,指出了应用现有法学方法论诉诸法律来解决环境问题之乏力,并认为科学发展观作为崭新的发展观,是对传统发展观的反思和超越,它将引发一系列价值观念的变革。这一变革反映在法哲学领域,则主要是触发了法学方法论的创新和法律生态化的趋向。     

Genetic structure among 38 populations from the United States based on 11 U.S. core Y chromosome STRs

A DNA database consisting of the 11 Y chromosome short-tandem-repeat (Y-STR) recommended by the Scientific Working Group on DNA Analysis Methods is constructed for 2517 individuals from 38 populations in the United States. The population samples derive from five ethnic groups currently living in 10 states. A multidimensional scaling (MDS) plot places the populations into four discrete clusters (African Americans (AA), European Americans (EA), Hispanic Americans (HA), and Asian Americans (SA)) and one dispersed cluster of Native Americans. An analysis of molecular variance (AMOVA) indicates that a large proportion of the total genetic variance is partitioned among ethnic groups (24.8%), whereas only a small amount (1.5%) is found among-populations within ethnic groups. Separate AMOVA analyses within each ethnic group show that only the NA sample contains statistically significant among-population variation. Pair wise population differentiation tests do uncover heterogeneity among EA and among HA populations; however, this is due to only a single sample within each group. The analyses support the creation of AA, EA, HA, and Asian American databases in which samples from different geographic regions within the United States are pooled. We recommend that separate databases be constructed for different NA groups.     

什么是法律现实主义——庞德、卢埃林、弗兰克之争

美国法律现实主义运动是上世纪初叶最引人瞩目的法律改革运动,其领军人物卢埃林和当时的法学鸿儒庞德之间的争论拉开了这一运动的序幕,作为庞德批判的主要对象弗兰克也加入了论战。论战的实际是关于如何适应社会发展进行法学研究的学者交流。通过论战,现实主义运动真正走到法学研究的前台,更清楚地展示了法律现实主义的真实面目,驱除法学界的曲解和误解。论战也展示了学者之间如何通过真诚的交流推动学术发展。     

程序性证明——一个证据法学不可缺失的概念

诉讼证明过程要符合程序正义,蕴涵程序正义理念的司法审查原则与程序性辩护的理论建构及其制度化最终要以程序性问题的证明为依托,现有的证明理论无力回应,证据法学理论也因此面临着困境。程序性证明是指在刑事诉讼过程中,控、辩一方或双方依法针对各自的程序性请求或程序性争议,在中立的裁判者面前展开的论证或说服活动。程序性证明的主体由控、辩、裁三方构成,各方主体中最为重要的分别是指控方中负责案件侦查的侦查人员、辩护方中的犯罪嫌疑人与裁判方中的侦查法官;程序性证明的对象是程序性请求的理由和程序性争议;程序性证明贯穿于刑事诉讼的整个过程;程序性证明的展开具有灵活性。程序性证明的提出,不仅有助于提升证据法学应有的理论品格,还有助于捍卫和发展"法律真实说"。     

中国企业赴美国上市的法律风险和对策

随着大量中国企业赴美国上市,与之相关的法律风险问题也逐渐暴露。当前,中国企业在美国上市的法律风险主要包括集团诉讼风险、证券违法违规处罚风险、退市风险、做空风险和中介机构欺诈风险。因此,中国企业赴美上市应充分了解、熟悉和掌握美国资本市场的相关法律和监管要求,并完善公司治理结构、内部控制和信息披露制度,以及提高应对集团诉讼的能力。     

Complete mitochondrial genome sequences for 265 African American and U.S. “Hispanic” individuals

Entire mitochondrial genome (mtGenome) sequences of 265 unrelated African American and U.S. “Hispanic” individuals were generated.     

美国外资并购国家安全审查制度的新发展

＂9.11＂之后,伴随美国对国家安全的关注度加强,2007年和2008年美国相继出台了FINSA和《外国人合并、收购、接管条例》,对美国外资并购国家安全审查制度做出了重大修改,涉及到审查对象、审查标准、审查程序和审查机构等方面。对审查对象的修改,主要是对＂受管辖的并购交易＂的范围进行了明确,同时对＂不受管辖的并购交易＂做出了列举。对审查标准的修改,主要体现在对＂关键性基础设施＂做出了界定,增加了CFIUS在审查时所考虑的6项因素,明确了与＂国家安全＂相关的＂国家安全担忧＂。对审查程序的修改,增加了审查前磋商、交易方须提供的信息,规定了并购交易审查的重新提起程序。对审查机构的修改,主要体现在增加和变动了CFIUS的成员,引入了牵头部门,加强了国会监督。     

大数据时代算法歧视的法律规制与司法审查——以美国法律实践为例

算法自动化决策为人们带来方便的同时,也可能因其决策过程的不透明和信息不对称而对某些群体造成歧视。实践中,算法歧视主要表现为偏见代理的算法歧视、特征选择的算法歧视和大数据杀熟三种基本形态。为了消除算法歧视给社会带来的影响,各国政府采取了一系列的规制措施。从规制的空间维度来看,这些措施包括原则性规制和特定性规制方式;从规制的时间维度来看,包括事后性规制和预防性规制;从规制的主体角度来看,包括自律性规制和他律性规制方式。在司法审查层面,不同待遇审查和差异性影响审查是两种基本模式。强调平衡“数字鸿沟”,抑制算法权力,并在此基础上,确保国家权力的运用能够促进科学技术的发展与进步,是大数据时代算法歧视的法律规制与司法审查的基本共识。     

Measuring U.S. innovative activity: business data at the U.S. Census Bureau

Innovation is seen as a source of strength and vitality in the U.S. economy. Better measures of innovative activity—including but not limited to innovation alone—could improve what we know about the sources of productivity and economic growth. The U.S. Census Bureau collects data on some measures of innovative activity that research shows affect economic performance. But understanding how the effects work requires more than just measures of innovative activity. It also requires solid statistical information about core measures of the economy so we can rule out the possibility that a measure of innovative activity merely proxies for something omitted from or measured poorly in the core data. Gaps in core measures can be filled by better integrating existing data and by more structured collections of new data. Versions of this paper were presented at the NSF/SRS Workshop, Advancing Measures of Innovation: Knowledge Flows, Business Metrics, and Measurement Strategies, Arlington VA, June 6–7, 2006, and circulated to the Advisory Committee on Measuring Innovation in the 21st Century Economy, Economics and Statistics Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce. This paper is unofficial and thus has not undergone the review accorded to official Census Bureau publications. Lucia Foster, Ron Jarmin, Jeffrey Mayer, Thomas Mesenbourg, and Daniel Weinberg, and the editors made valuable comments. However, the views expressed in the paper are those of the author and not necessarily those of the U.S. Census Bureau.     

Radicalization of U.S. prisoners

Research Summary
Concern has been expressed that prisoner radicalization poses a high probability threat to the safety of the United States. Although the threat of terrorist acts planned in prison is known to be above zero because of a nearly executed terrorist plot hatched in a state prison, the central finding of this research is that the actual probability is modest. The reasons for a modest probability are fourfold: Order and stability in U.S. prisons were achieved during the buildup period, prison officials successfully implemented efforts to counter the "importation" of radicalism, correctional leadership infused antiradicalization into their agencies, and inmates' low levels of education decreased the appeals of terrorism.
Policy Implications
The prison environment permits a great deal of information to be collected on the activities and, more difficult to detect, planned activities of inmates after they are released. This environment requires the attentive observation of staff, collection of information from inmates, and efforts at different levels of a correctional agency to assemble, collate, and assess information; much of it is likely to be false and some will be vital.     

Race-Based Peremptory Challenges: An Empirical Analysis of Litigation from the U.S. Court of Appeals, 2002–2006

This paper examines race-based peremptory challenges. Such challenges occur during the voir dire jury selection process. The process allows both the defense and the prosecution to strike jurors who they believe will not decide cases fairly. However, in the case of Batson v. Kentucky 476 U.S. 79 (1986), the Supreme Court ruled that race could not be used as a factor in eliminating prospective jurors. This paper examines federal litigation for five years in which it was alleged that race was used as a factor in removing a juror. An examination of the cases revealed that most of the cases involved sole male litigants who allege that there were multiple race-based peremptory challenges used in their cases. Moreover, most of the cases that led to the allegations involved violent offenses. Other case characteristics are noted, but of most significance was the finding that most appellants lost their cases. As such, the courts felt that most of the challenges were, in fact, race neutral. The implications of this research are discussed. This study was funded by an undergraduate research grant from Penn State University.