:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
題名:言論自由限制之憲法爭議--以美國最高法院有關抗議墮胎緩衝區之判決為探討核心
書刊名:中央警察大學法學論集
作者:許炳華
作者(外文):Hsu, Pin-hua
出版日期:2015
卷期:28
頁次:頁51-92
主題關鍵詞:抗議墮胎緩衝區隱私權墮胎權擄獲聽眾理論不受干擾之權利言論自由利益平衡Buffer zoneRight to privacyRight to abortionCaptive audienceRight to let aloneFreedom of speechBalance of interests
原始連結:連回原系統網址new window
相關次數:
  • 被引用次數被引用次數:期刊(0) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0)
  • 排除自我引用排除自我引用:0
  • 共同引用共同引用:101
  • 點閱點閱:66
期刊論文
1.李震山(200308)。憲法中基本權利保障規範間之關係。臺灣本土法學雜誌,49,127-133。  延伸查詢new window
2.陳昭如(20140900)。打造墮胎權:解嚴前墮胎合法化的婦運法律動員與權利構框。中研院法學期刊,15,1-76。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.William, Backer(2002)。Escaping a Catch-22 by Making Everyone Lose: The Court Limits Free Speech in Hill v. Colorado。Stetson L. Rev.,31,257-309。  new window
4.Bencivenga, John W.(1995)。Constitutional Law-When Rights Collide: Buffer Zones and Abortion Clinics-Madsen v. Women’s Health Center。Fla. St. U. L. Rev.,22,695+699。  new window
5.Brownstein, Alan E.(1996)。Rules of Engagement for Cultural Wars: Regulating Conduct, Unprotected Speech, and Protected Expression in Anti-Abortion Protests。U. C. Davis L. Rev.,29,1163-1192。  new window
6.Clay, Calvert(1997)。Free Speech and Content-Neutrality: Inconsistent, Applications of an Increasingly Malleable Doctrine。Mcgeorge L. Rev.,29,69+76-77。  new window
7.Erwin, Chemerinsky(2000)。Content Neutrality As a Central Problem of Freedom of Speech: Problems in the Supreme Court’s Application。S. Cal. L. Rev.,74,49-64。  new window
8.Chen, Alan K.(2003)。Statutory Speech Bubbles, First Amendment Overbreadth, and Improper Legislative Purpose。Harv. C. R. C. L L. Rev.,38,31-90。  new window
9.Cowan, Kristen G.(2001)。The Tailoring of Statutory Bubble Zones: Balancing Free Speech and Patient's Rights。J. Crim. L. and Criminology,91,385-427。  new window
10.Ellis, Deborah A.、Wu, Yolanda S.(1996)。Of Buffer Zones and Broken Bones: Balancing Access to Abortion and Anti-Abortion Protestors, First Amendment Rights in Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network。Brook. L. Rev.,62,547-583。  new window
11.Elliott, Bryan K.(1995)。Madsen v. Women’s Health Center, Inc.: Heightened Scrutiny for Injimctions Implicating First Amendment Freedoms。Cap. U. L. Rev.,24,457-484。  new window
12.Gillen, Sean Matthew(1998)。The Supreme Court Drops the Buffered Ball and Ceases and Desists from a Tradition of Stare Decisis in Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network。Creighton L. Rev.,31,953-996。  new window
13.Jill, Grinham(2001)。Hill v. Colorado: The Court Clarifies the Proper Review of Legislation Regulating Speech in the Forum Surrounding Health Care Facilities。Pace L. Rev.,22,239-267。  new window
14.Haiman, Franklin S.(1972)。Speech v. Privacy: Is There A Right Not to Be Spoken To?。NW. U. L. Rev.,67,153-181。  new window
15.Kelly, Tara K.(1995)。Silencing the Lambs: Restricting the First Amendment Rights of Abortion. Clinic Protesters in Madsen v. Women’s Health Center。S. Cal. L. Rev.,68,427+454。  new window
16.Lee, William E.(2002)。The Unwilling Listener: Hill v. Colorado’s Chilling Effect on Unorthodox Speech。U. C. Davis L. Rev.,35,387-426。  new window
17.Nauman, Robert D.(2002)。The Captive Audience Doctrine And Floating Buffer Zones: An Analysis of Hill v. Colorado。Cap. U. L. Rev.,30,769-821。  new window
18.Joanne, Neilson(1996)。Madsen v. Women’s Health Center, Inc.: Protection against Antiabortionist Terrorism。Pac L. Rev.,325,331-357。  new window
19.Oberst, Brian W.(2000)。Buffering Free Speech: An Examination of the Impact of Colorado's Buffer Zone Law on Protected Speech after Hill V. Colorado。Hamline L. Rev.,24,89-118。  new window
20.Osaki, Keli N.(1996)。Striking an Unequal Balance Between the Right of Women to Obtain an Abortion and the Right of Pro-Life Groups to Freedom of Expression。Pepp. L. Rev.,24,203-243。  new window
21.Pang, Amber M.(1999)。Speech, Conduct, and Regulation of Abortion Protest by Court Injunction: From Madsen v. Women’s Health Center to Schenck v. Pro-Choice Network。Gonz. L. Rev.,34,201-227。  new window
22.Raskin, Jamin B.、LeBlanc, Clark L.(2001)。Disfavored Speech About Favored Rights: Hill v. Colorado,The Vanishing Public Forum and the Need for an Objective Speech Discrimination Test。Am. U. L. Rev.,51,179-228。  new window
23.Seibring, Jennifer J.(1995)。If It’s Not Too Much To Ask, Could You Please Shut Up? Madsen v. Women’s Health Ctr., Inc., 114 S. Ct 2516。S. III. U. L. J.,20,205-222。  new window
24.Sullivan, Kathleen M.(2001)。Sex? Money, and Groups: Free Speech and Association Decisions in the October 1999 Term。Pepp. L. Rev.,28,723-746。  new window
25.Mark, Villanueva(2001)。Hill v. Colorado: The Supreme Court’s Deviation from Traditional First Amendment Jurisprudence to Silence the Message of Abortion Protesters。Catih. U. L. Rev.,51,371-404。  new window
26.Jessica, Wainwright(2001)。The Evolutionary War on First Amendment Rights and Abortion Clinic Demonstration。New Eng. L. Rev.,36,231-281。  new window
27.Wilhelm, Christy E.(2000)。If You Can’t Say Something Nice, Don’t Say Anything at All: Hill v. Colorado and the Antiabortion Protest Controversy。Campbell L. Rev.,23,117-141。  new window
28.Jennifer, Wohlstadter(1995)。Madsen v. Wbmen’s Health Center, Inc.: The Constitutionality of Abortion Clinic Buffer Zones。Golden Gate U. L. Rev.,25,543-577。  new window
29.Workman, Russell D.(1992)。Balancing the Right to Privacy and the First Amendment。Hous. L. Rev.,29,1059+1060-1095。  new window
30.Zych, James J.(2001)。Hill v. Colorado and the Evolving Rights of the Unwilling Listener。St. Louis L. J.,45,1281-1307。  new window
31.黃維幸(20111000)。新聞採訪與隱私的衝突與平衡--兼評釋字第六八九號。月旦法學,197,5-31。new window  延伸查詢new window
32.蕭淑芬(20080600)。表現自由與隱私權保障之衝突--以出版自由對隱私權之侵害為例。臺灣法學雜誌,107,221-229。  延伸查詢new window
33.黃昭元(20040500)。憲法權利限制的司法審查標準:美國類型化多元標準模式的比較分析。國立臺灣大學法學論叢,33(3),45-148。new window  延伸查詢new window
34.廖福特(20060600)。個人影像隱私與新聞自由之權衡--Von Hannover及Peck判決分析與臺灣借鏡。政大法學評論,91,145-198。new window  延伸查詢new window
35.Warren, Samuel D.、Brandeis, Louis D.(1890)。The Right to Privacy。Harvard Law Review,4(5),193-220。  new window
圖書
1.Tribe, Laurence H.(2000)。American Constitutional Law。  new window
2.Gerald, Gunther、Kathleen, Sullivan(1997)。Constitutional Law。  new window
3.Hem, Warren M.(1991)。Proxemics: The Application of Theory to Conflict Arising from Antiabortion Demonstrations。  new window
4.Smolla, Rodney A.(1999)。Smolla and Nimmer on Freedom of Speech。  new window
5.陳慈陽(200511)。憲法學。臺北:陳慈陽。  延伸查詢new window
6.李惠宗(20060900)。憲法要義。臺北市:月旦。  延伸查詢new window
7.馮曉青(2006)。知識產權法利益平衡理論。中國政法大學出版社。  延伸查詢new window
 
 
 
 
第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁 top
:::
無相關著作
 
QR Code
QRCODE