沃伦法院 

沃伦法院(1953年-1969年)

沃伦法院(英文:Warren Court)是对第14任美国首席大法官厄尔·沃伦(Earl Warren)主政时期的美国最高法院的通称。[1]厄尔·沃伦于1953年10月5日正式继任弗雷德·文森成为美国首席大法官,直至1969年6月23日退休、由沃伦·厄尔·伯格(Warren E. Burger)接任成为首席大法官。[1][2][3]

厄尔·沃伦领导的美国最高法院自由派多数将司法权力运用到了极致,常常令保守派的反对者瞠目结舌。沃伦法院大大扩增了公民权利、公民自由、司法权力以及美国联邦政府的权力。[4] 该法院被广泛认为造就了美国历史上一场划时代的自由主义宪政革命(Constitutional Revolution),成为了当时美国自由主义、进步主义的堡垒,彰显出对自由民主平等人权的深刻信仰。[5][6][7][8][9][10][11][12]

沃伦法院将美国带入了“一人一票”的普选时代,并制定了后来著名的米兰达警告[13][14][15]此外,该法院还终结了美国的种族隔离制度,推广了美国权利法案(包括美国宪法第十四修正案),终止了公立学校内强制背诵官方祷词的祈祷活动,等等。沃伦法院是历史上美国司法权力所到达的顶峰,从那以后司法权力逐渐衰弱,但依旧对美国社会保持长久影响。 [16][17]

  1. ^ 1.0 1.1 The Warren Court, 1953-1969. supremecourthistory.org. [2019-10-04]. (原始内容存档于2019-04-01). 
  2. ^ Earl Warren, 1953-1969. supremecourthistory.org. Supreme Court Historical Society. [2019-10-05]. (原始内容存档于2018-12-10). 
  3. ^ Warren E. Burger, 1969-1986. supremecourthistory.org. [2019-10-05]. (原始内容存档于2019-09-26). 
  4. ^ Sunstein, Cass Breyer's Judicial Pragmatism University of Chicago Law School. November, 2005. pg. 3-4. ("To many people, the idea of judicial deference to the elected branches lost much of its theoretical appeal in the 1950s and 1960s, when the Supreme Court, under the leadership of Chief Justice Earl Warren, was invalidating school segregation (Brown v. Bd. of Educ.), protecting freedom of speech (Brandenburg v. Ohio) striking down poll taxes (Harper v. Bd. of Elections), requiring a rule of one person, one vote (Reynolds v. Sims), and protecting accused criminals against police abuse (Miranda v. Arizona)."
  5. ^ Pederson, William D. Earl Warren. www.mtsu.edu. [2019-09-15]. (原始内容存档于2019-07-06) (英语). 
  6. ^ Horwitz, Morton J. The Warren Court And The Pursuit Of Justice. Washington and Lee Law Review. Winter 1993, 50 [2019-10-04]. (原始内容存档于2015-09-25). 
  7. ^ Driver, Justin. The Constitutional Conservatism of the Warren Court. California Law Review. October 2012, 100 (5): 1101–1167. JSTOR 23408735. 
  8. ^ Powe, Jr., Lucas A. The Warren Court and American Politics. Harvard University Press. 2002. 
  9. ^ Swindler, William F. The Warren Court: Completion of a Constitutional Revolution (PDF). Vanderbilt Law Review. 1970, 23 [2019-10-04]. (原始内容 (PDF)存档于2019-10-03). 
  10. ^ America’s highest court needs term limits. The Economist. 2018-09-15 [2019-10-05]. ISSN 0013-0613. (原始内容存档于2019-09-21). 
  11. ^ Earl Warren, 83, Who Led High Court In Time of Vast Social Change, Is Dead. archive.nytimes.com. [2019-10-05]. (原始内容存档于2019-07-01). 
  12. ^ 厄尔·沃伦:让法之正义普照天下. 人民法院报. [2019-09-25]. (原始内容存档于2021-05-17). 
  13. ^ Biography of Earl Warren. warren.ucsd.edu. [2019-10-04]. (原始内容存档于2019-04-07). 
  14. ^ One Person, One Vote | The Constitution Project. www.theconstitutionproject.com. [2019-10-04]. (原始内容存档于2019-09-24). 
  15. ^ Miranda v. Arizona. Oyez. [2019-10-04]. (原始内容存档于2019-09-05) (英语). 
  16. ^ Sunstein at 4 ("Is it possible to defend the Warren Court against the charge that its decisions were fatally undemocratic? The most elaborate effort came from John Hart Ely, the Warren Court's most celebrated expositor and defender, who famously argued for what he called a "representation-reinforcing" approach to judicial review. Like Thayer, Ely emphasized the central importance for democratic self-rule. But Ely famously insisted that if self-rule is really our lodestar, then unqualified judicial deference to legislatures is utterly senseless. Some rights, Ely argued, are indispensable to self-rule, and the Court legitimately protects those rights not in spite of democracy but in its name. The right to vote and the right to speak are the central examples. Courts promote democracy when they protect those rights.")
  17. ^ Sunstein at 4 ("Ely went much further. He argued that some groups are at a systematic disadvantage in the democratic process, and that when courts protect 'discrete and insular minorities,' they are reinforcing democracy too.")



取材自維基百科 - 中文時事百科