Perbezaan antara semakan "Duluan kehakiman"

Pergi ke navigasi Pergi ke carian
60 bait ditambah ,  15 tahun lalu
==Ketulenan dan stare decisis==
{{terjemahan}}
[[Ketulenan]], iaitu doktrin yang menyatakan bahawa pengertian penulisan sesuatu teks mesti diaplikasi, merupakan satu lawan kepada ''stare decisis'', tetapi tidak semestinya secara menyeluruh. Seperti yang dinotakan di atas, "''Stare decisis'' tidak lazimnya merupakan satu doktrin yang digunakan dalam sistem [[undang-undang sivil (sistem perundangan)|undang-undang sivil]] kerana ia melanggar prinsip yang hanya legislatif berhak membuat undang-undang"; Hakim [[Antonin Scalia]] dalam bukunya ''A Matter of Interpretation'' (Suatu hal pentafsiran) yang Amerika merupakan satu negara undang-undang sivil dan bukannya negara common law dan dengan ini, para pemikir ketulenan tidak suka mengunapakai duluan apabila ia bertentangan dengan perlembagaan. Meskipun begini, Ketulenan adalah satu teori penafsiran berbanding pembinaan, dan masih terdapatnya ruang dalam pemikiran pentulen untuk ''stare decisis''; apabila [[peraturan pengertian literal|pengertian literal]] boleh membawa kepada maksud-maksud alternatif, keputusan lepas lazimnya dilihat sebagai satu panduan yang absah, dengan alasan bahawa ia tidak boleh menyangkal apa yang dikatakan oleh teks tulen.
[[Ketulenan]] - the doctrine that holds that the meaning of a written text must be applied - is in tension with ''stare decisis'', but is not necessarily irrevocably opposed. As noted at top, "''Stare decisis'' is not usually a doctrine used in [[civil law (legal system)|civil law]] systems, because it violates the principle that only the legislature may make law"; Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] argues in ''A Matter of Interpretation'' that America is a civil law not common law nation, and with that in mind, it should come as no surprise that originalists are generally unwilling to defer to precedent when precedent seems to come into conflict with the constitution. However, Originalism being a theory of interpretation rather than construction, there is still room within an originalist paradigm for ''stare decisis''; whenever the [[plain meaning rule|plain meaning]] of the text is open to alternative constructions, past precedent is generally seen as a valid guide, with the qualifier being that it cannot trump what the text actually says.
 
SomeSesetengah originalistspemikir goketulenan evenpergi furtherdengan lebih jauh lagi. InDalam hisperbicaraan confirmation hearingspengesahannya, JusticeHakim [[Clarence Thomas]] answeredmenjawab asoalan question fromdaripada Senator [[Strom Thurmond]] about his willingnessakan tokesediaannya overturnmenolak precedentsatu thusduluan:
:''I think overruling a case or reconsidering a case is a very serious matter. Certainly, you would have to be of the view that a case is incorrectly decided, but I think even that is not adequate. There are some cases that you may not agree with that should not be overruled. Stare decisis provides continuity to our system, it provides predictability, and in our process of case-by-case decision-making, I think it is a very important and critical concept. A judge that wants to reconsider a case and certainly one who wants to overrule a case has the burden of demonstrating that not only is the case indirect, but that it would be appropriate, in view of stare decisis, to make that additional step of overruling that case''.<ref>[[Clarence Thomas|Thomas, Clarence]] (1991). ''[U.S.] Senate Confirmation Hearings.'' qtd. in [http://court.ontheissues.org/Court/Clarence_Thomas_Abortion.htm ''On the Issues''] "Clarence Thomas on Abortion: Overruling previous cases is a very serious matter." Accessed 20:37, [[22 September]] [[2005]] (UTC).</ref>
 
{{petikan|Saya berpendapat yang menolak satu kes atau menimbang semula satu kes adalah satu perkara yang berat. Semestinya, anda mestilah berpendapat yang satu kes itu diputuskan secara salah, tetapi saya fikir itupun tidak mencukupi. Stare decisis memberi lanjutan kepada sistem kita, ia memberikan kepastian, dan dalam prosis pembuatan keputusan dari satu kes ke satu kes, saya fikir ia satu konsep yang amat penting dan kritikal. Satu hakim yang hendak menimbang semula satu kes punyai beban yang ia bukan sahaja tidak langsung, tetapi ia perlu, dalam situasi berkenaan, dalam penglihatan stare decisis, untuk membuat langkah tambahan sedemikian''.|[[Clarence Thomas]] (1991)| ''[U.S.] Senate Confirmation Hearings.'' qtd. in [http://court.ontheissues.org/Court/Clarence_Thomas_Abortion.htm ''On the Issues''] "Clarence Thomas on Abortion: Overruling previous cases is a very serious matter." Accessed 20:37, [[22 September]] [[2005]] (UTC).</ref>}}
Possibly he has changed his mind, or there are a very large body of cases which merit "the additional step" of ignoring the doctrine; according to [[Scalia]], "[[Clarence Thomas]] doesn't believe in stare decisis, period. If a constitutional line of authority is wrong, he would say, let’s get it right." <ref>{{cite paper | author=[[Jonathan Ringel|Ringel, Jonathan]] | title=The Bombshell in the Clarence Thomas Biography | publisher=[http://www.dailyreportonline.com/ Fulton County Daily Report] | date=2004 | url=http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1090180289132 }}</ref>
 
PossiblyKemungkinan hebeliau hastelah changedmengubah his mindpendiriannya, oratau thereterdapat aresatu abadan verybesar largekes bodyyang of cases which meritmemerlukan "thelangkah additionaltambahan stepsedemikian" oftidak ignoringpedulikan thedoktrin doctrineitu; according tomengikut [[Scalia]], "[[Clarence Thomas]] doesn'tlangsung believetidak inmempercayai doktrin stare decisis, period. IfJika asatu constitutionalautoriti lineperlembagaan of authority is wrongsalah, hedia wouldakan sayberkata, let’smarilah getkita it rightbetulkannyua." <ref>{{cite paper | author=[[Jonathan Ringel|Ringel, Jonathan]] | title=The Bombshell in the Clarence Thomas Biography | publisher=[http://www.dailyreportonline.com/ Fulton County Daily Report] | date=2004 | url=http://www.law.com/jsp/article.jsp?id=1090180289132 }}</ref>
 
==Kebaikan dan keburukan==
3,214

suntingan

Menu pandu arah