理查德.波斯納,先後以最優生和年級第一名畢業於耶魯大學英文係(1959)和哈佛大學法學院(1962)。曾任美國聯邦最高法院大法官助理、聯邦政府律師、斯坦福大學法學院副教授(1968)、芝加哥大學法學院教授(1969)和講座教授。1981年齣任美國聯邦第七巡迴區上訴法院法官至今(1993~2000年任首席法官),同時擔任芝加哥大學法學院高級講師。
A distinguished and experienced appellate court judge, Richard A. Posner offers in this new book a unique and, to orthodox legal thinkers, a startling perspective on how judges and justices decide cases. When conventional legal materials enable judges to ascertain the true facts of a case and apply clear pre-existing legal rules to them, Posner argues, they do so straightforwardly; that is the domain of legalist reasoning. However, in non-routine cases, the conventional materials run out and judges are on their own, navigating uncharted seas with equipment consisting of experience, emotions, and often unconscious beliefs. In doing so, they take on a legislative role, though one that is confined by internal and external constraints, such as professional ethics, opinions of respected colleagues, and limitations imposed by other branches of government on freewheeling judicial discretion.Occasional legislators, judges are motivated by political considerations in a broad and sometimes a narrow sense of that term. In that open area, most American judges are legal pragmatists. Legal pragmatism is forward-looking and policy-based. It focuses on the consequences of a decision in both the short and the long term, rather than on its antecedent logic. Legal pragmatism so understood is really just a form of ordinary practical reasoning, rather than some special kind of legal reasoning.Supreme Court justices are uniquely free from the constraints on ordinary judges and uniquely tempted to engage in legislative forms of adjudication. More than any other court, the Supreme Court is best understood as a political court.
發表於2024-09-12
How Judges Think 2024 pdf epub mobi 電子書 下載
1、怎麼理解“政治性”?模糊之中,總是容易武斷地將政治與權力掛鈎。似乎,所謂政治,不過是權力的鬥爭,不過是領導人相互扳手腕的另一種存在。或許藉著人民的外套,但終歸是戒律嚴明的你我不理解。 放到中國的司法現實來看,則意味著,法院是不是得時時刻刻地跟在政府後麵俯...
評分經驗地理解法官的思維和行為 ———《法官如何思考》代譯序/硃蘇力 法官當然首先必須依法,但他還必須考慮“治國”和“辦事”。這就是政治的考量 所謂“政治的”,波斯納界定,它首先指法官在開放領域的被迫的“偶爾立法”。它還可以指一些看似純技術性判斷 ...
評分一 長期以來的法學學習給我以法官以這種印象,法官隻是規則的適用者,在審判中應當保持中立,保證其客觀性。法官在審判中不得存在任何偏私,而且須在外觀上使任何正直的人不對其中立性有任何閤理的懷疑。從而我們相信,法官在工...
評分他的書總是很貴 這是買的第一本書,總體說來還是可以的,不會後悔。 要瞭解下美國聯邦法院的法官和美國司法,看看還是可以的。 裏麵提到的那幾個法官寫的書,我還沒看過,但是看起來波斯納不太喜歡他們。蘇力翻譯成“邪說”,是不是邪說,還是要等自己看瞭纔知道,目前時間不夠...
評分一說起美國的法官,我們往往有一種先入為主的印象:專業,不講政治,隻講法律。法律如何規定,法官便如何斷案,他們不需要考慮除法條以外的其他因素。這時候,浮現在我們腦海裏的是那句著名的法諺:風能進,雨能進,國王不能進。 美國的法院果真是與政治絕緣的麼?我最近在讀...
圖書標籤: 法律 法學 英文 經典 美國 製度
A possible good book...
評分A possible good book...
評分A possible good book...
評分A possible good book...
評分波斯納的書都是一個套路:看起來是一大篇吐槽,細讀還挺有道理,讀完以後又感到有些無力。司法解釋一嚮被認為是法院的製衡要器,焉知實用主義法官可能邊解釋邊罵荒謬。但“實用”僅是一種指明方嚮的態度,連最聰明的法官也隻能嘆息一聲,又翻起哲學書瞭。
How Judges Think 2024 pdf epub mobi 電子書 下載