为最高人民法院司法解释权一辩

尽管最高人民法院的司法解释工作尚存在各种不足,然而我们更应该看到其对于我国法制建设与司法实践的积极意义。最高人民法院司法解释权的正当性可以从实在法和学理两个方面得到辩护。要推进我国的司法解释制度,就要在肯定最高人民法院司法解释权之正当性的基础上,对该制度的另一些重要问题展开进一步研究。     

The Supreme Court's spring term: abortion, the right to die, and the decline of privacy rights

Wing analyzes the constitutional significance and the important long-term implications for health policy of three 1990 U.S. Supreme Court decisions: Hodgson v. Minnesota, Ohio v. Akron Center for Reproductive Health, and Cruzan v. Director, Missouri Department of Health. Hodgson and Ohio upheld state statutes requiring parental notification of a minor's impending abortion. Cruzan upheld a state court decision refusing to allow the family of a patient in a persistent vegetative state to discontinue life-sustaining treatment. Wing argues that these decisions reach far beyond "the abortion issue" or "the right to die." Not only have they narrowed the constitutional protection of individual privacy, but they allow states to regulate activities like abortion in a manner that indicates that the Court is prepared to repeal the notion that individual privacy is entitled to enhanced judicial protection.     

Competing Supremacies and Clashing Institutional Rationalities: the Danish Supreme Court's Decision in the Ajos Case and the National Limits of Judicial Cooperation

On 6 December 2016, the Supreme Court of Denmark (SCDK) ruled on the grounds of Ajos case. The ruling concerned the scope of the principle of non‐discrimination on the grounds of age and whether a national court could weigh the principle of non‐discrimination on grounds of age against the principles of legal controversy, as the protection of legitimate expectations. The ruling has caused a great deal of controversy as the SCDK defied clear guidelines from the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in the ruling. Moreover, the case has been seen by some as an example of a new ‘sovereigntism’ in Danish law that is at odds with the project of European integration through law. This article explains the case from both an EU law and Danish constitutional law perspective. It concludes by providing a set of explanations of the new course of the SCDK in its relationship with the EU.     

Pulling Punches: Congressional Constraints on the Supreme Court's Constitutional Rulings, 1987–2000

To date, no study has found evidence that the U.S. Supreme Court is constrained by Congress in its constitutional decisions. We addressed the selection bias inherent in previous studies with a statute‐centered, rather than a case‐centered, analysis, following all congressional laws enacted between 1987 and 2000. We uncovered considerable congressional constraint in the Court's constitutional rulings. In particular, we found that the probability that the Rehnquist Court would strike a liberal congressional law rose between 47% and 288% as a result of the 1994 congressional elections, depending on the legislative model used.     

Presidents, Political Regimes, and Contentious Supreme Court Nominations: A Historical Institutional Model

Before the nominations of John Roberts and Samuel Alito, scholars consistently pointed to the presence of divided government as an underlying reason for conflict in the confirmation process for U.S. Supreme Court nominees. However, the importance of party unity and coalition-building appointments—each of which highlights the role of the president in the process—should not be underestimated in these confirmation battles. Moreover, an examination of the sixty twentieth-century nominations reveals that a presidency-focused political regimes model provides significant explanatory force for understanding when and what types of nominees are likely to face the most resistance in the Senate. It does so by incorporating Stephen Skowronek's analytical framework for understanding presidential authority to explain how and why different periods of political time affect presidential attempts to shape the U.S. Supreme Court through appointments. In turn, the model places recent conflict in the confirmation process in historical context.     

走向后官僚制时代：公务员价值取向的转变

官僚制度下形成了官僚制组织及其成员以理性为基础的价值取向,但是新公共管理运动的兴起,使官僚制组织及其理论受到了冲击,新的社会需求要求政府公务员树立新的价值取向。我国作为后发展中国家,在对官僚制组织体制进行反思和改革的过程中,应形成具有我国特色的公务员价值取向。     

Jesting at scars that never felt a wound: The US Supreme Court's new doctrine of licensee standing without breach

Until recently, it was assumed that patent licensees in compliancewith terms of their licence agreements would lack ‘standing’to sue their licensors, but in MedImmune v Genentech, the SupremeCourt of the United States held that federal courts in the UShave jurisdiction over declaratory judgment actions by patentlicensees asserting the invalidity, unenforceability, or non-infringementof a licensed patent, even where the licensee is in full compliancewith the licence agreement.     

Compensation and Compliance: Sources of Public Acceptance of the U.K. Supreme Court's Brexit Decision

The perception that a high court's decision is binding and final is a crucial prerequisite for its ability to settle political conflicts. Under what conditions are citizens more likely to accept controversial judicial rulings? Mass acceptance is determined, in part, by how rulings are framed during public debate. This paper takes a broad view of the strategies and actors that influence the discursive environment surrounding judgments, calling attention to hitherto unexamined determinants of mass acceptance. We theorize that third parties can boost acceptance by pledging compliance, and that courts can moderate opposition by compensating losers. We also look at how populist attacks on judiciaries, common in contemporary democracies, affect acceptance. We test these propositions using a survey experiment conducted in the aftermath of the UK Supreme Court's Brexit decision, the most salient judgment handed down by this court to date. The paper moves the literature on courts and public opinion beyond the United States, and presents evidence backing largely untested assumptions at the heart of models of judicial behavior regarding the benefits of crafting rulings with an eye on the preferences of key audiences.     

我国民营经济制度变迁、制度"锁定"及"解锁"研究

我国民营经济制度变迁历程是我国经济体制改革过程的一个缩影.运用新制度经济学分析范式对我国民营经济制度变迁、制度"锁定"及制度"解锁"进行研究探讨,有助于我们总结民营经济发展的经验,把握民营经济未来的发展方向,为我国民营经济更好更快发展提供有益的参考.     

重塑比例过失原则：《最高人民法院关于审理船舶碰撞纠纷案件若干问题的规定》评述

就《最高人民法院关于审理船舶碰撞纠纷案件若干问题的规定》所涉及的一些问题进行评述,包括船舶碰撞纠纷案件适用的准据法、比例过失原则、责任主体等,指出该规定重塑了比例过失原则,发展了中国船舶碰撞法,澄清了审判实践中的一些长期未决的问题。