臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

:::

詳目顯示

回上一頁
第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆   第一頁 上一頁 下一頁 最後一頁
/1頁
題名：司法審查作為憲政工程--結構最小主義的提議
書刊名：中研院法學期刊
作者：蘇彥圖
作者(外文)：Su, Yen-tu
出版日期：2018
卷期：22
頁次：頁1-76
主題關鍵詞：司法院大法官；司法審查；憲政工程；憲政體制；權力分立；民主法；憲政人格；司法最小主義；Taiwan' s Constitutional Court；Judicial review；Constitutional engineering；Political institutions；Separation of powers；The law of democracy；Constitutional personae；Judicial Minimalism
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(2) 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:2
  • 共同引用共同引用:378
  • 點閱點閱:56
期刊論文
1.Klarman, Michael J.(1996)。Majoritarian Judicial Review: The Entrenchment Problem。Georgetown Law Journal，85(3)，491-553。  new window
2.Dawood, Yasmin(2008)。The Antidomination Model and the Judicial Oversight of Democracy。The Georgetown Law Journal，96(5)，1411-1485。  new window
3.法治斌(20010100)。與大法官共治，難嗎？。憲政時代，26(3)，75-92。  延伸查詢new window
4.陳柏霖(20081000)。論我國國會政黨比例代表之門檻規定--兼以德國法為比較對象。憲政時代，34(2)，123-152。  延伸查詢new window
5.Waldron, Jeremy(2006)。The Core of the Case Against Judicial Review。Yale Law Journal，115(6)，1346-1406。  new window
6.張嘉尹(20131015)。誰跨過了憲政主義的邊界？--「九月政爭」的憲法學詮釋。臺灣法學雜誌，234，5-16。  延伸查詢new window
7.廖元豪(20131001)。開除國會議長是違憲？。臺灣法學雜誌，233，9-13。  延伸查詢new window
8.蘇彥圖(20131001)。兩種紀律間的戰爭﹕一個關於臺灣當前黨／國分際爭議的敘事與評論。臺灣法學雜誌，233，14-18。  延伸查詢new window
9.陳英鈐(20131001)。假處分定馬、王憲政地位。臺灣法學雜誌，233，3-8。  延伸查詢new window
10.蘇彥圖(20140400)。釋憲時刻--初探司法院大法官的議程設定及其憲政效應。憲政時代，39(4)，25-69。  延伸查詢new window
11.陳英鈐(20051000)。民主鞏固與違憲審查--釋字第五八五號解釋的困境。月旦法學，125，63-77。new window  延伸查詢new window
12.Elmendorf, Christopher S.(2006)。Election Commissions and Electoral Reform: An Overview。Election Law Journal，5(4)，425-446。  new window
13.王鵬翔、張永健(20150900)。經驗面向的規範意義--論實證研究在法學中的角色。中研院法學期刊，17，205-294。new window  延伸查詢new window
14.蘇永欽(20060900)。沒有方法的解釋只是一個政治決定--簡評司法院第六一三號解釋。月旦法學，136，6-20。new window  延伸查詢new window
15.陳英鈐(20020300)。最高司法機關的規則制定權與司法行政監督--從德國法論釋字五三○。臺灣本土法學雜誌，32，97-106。  延伸查詢new window
16.李惠宗(19970700)。國家組織法的憲法解釋--兼評司法院大法官會議釋字三八七與四一九號解釋。國立臺灣大學法學論叢，26(4)，13-75。new window  延伸查詢new window
17.郭銘松(19980400)。從憲法修正條文之可司法性論政治問題不審查原則--以美國聯邦憲法第二十七增補條款為例。憲政時代，23(4)，1-22。  延伸查詢new window
18.李念祖(20000100)。再論「政治問題」理論在我國憲法解釋上之運用。國立臺灣大學法學論叢，29(2)，43-77。new window  延伸查詢new window
19.李惠宗(20071200)。憲法機關忠誠與立法不作為的違憲性--大法官釋字第六三二號解釋評析。月旦法學，151，156-168。new window  延伸查詢new window
20.周志宏(20020300)。日本最高裁判所規則制定權之探討--兼評大法官釋字第五三○號解釋。臺灣本土法學雜誌，32，60-69。  延伸查詢new window
21.李建良(20020300)。論審判獨立與司法行政命令權之關係--解析司法院大法官釋字第五三○號解釋。臺灣本土法學雜誌，32，43-59。  延伸查詢new window
22.廖元豪(20020900)。從政治問題理論，論兩岸關係憲法定位之可司法性。政大法學評論，71，27-77。new window  延伸查詢new window
23.Eule, Julian N.(1990)。Judicial Review of Direct Democracy。Yale Law Journal，99，1503-1589。  new window
24.Elhauge, Einer R.(1991)。Does Interest Group Theory Justify More Intrusive Judicial Review?。Yale Law Journal，101(1)，31-110。  new window
25.黃德福、蘇子喬(20070300)。大法官釋憲對我國憲政體制的形塑。臺灣民主季刊，4(1)，1-49。new window  延伸查詢new window
26.許宗力(20141100)。2013年憲法發展回顧。國立臺灣大學法學論叢，43(特刊)，1031-1074。new window  延伸查詢new window
27.陳愛娥(20070900)。憲法解釋、立法與普通司法的權限互動：評司法院大法官釋字第六二七號解釋--以司法院大法官的論述方式為檢討重點。月旦法學，148，98-115。new window  延伸查詢new window
28.Issacharoff, Samuel、Pildes, Richard H.(1998)。Politics as Markets: Partisan Lockups of the Democratic Process。Stanford Law Review，50(3)，643-717。  new window
29.Su, Yen-Tu(2011)。Retracing Political Antitrust: A Genealogy and Its Lessons。The Journal of Law and Politics，27(1)，1-62。  new window
30.Williams, Kieran(2005)。Judicial Review of Electoral Thresholds in Germany, Russia, and the Czech Republic。Election Law Journal，4(3)，191-206。  new window
31.Thayer, James Bradley(1893)。The origin and scope of the American doctrine of constitutional law。Harvard Law Review，7(3)，129-156。  new window
32.Issacharoff, Samuel(2002)。Gerrymandering and Political Cartels。Harvard Law Review，116，593-648。  new window
33.Pildes, Richard H.(1999)。The Theory of Political Competition。Virginia Law Review，85，1605-1626。  new window
34.林超駿(20140400)。初論法庭之友與美國最高法院--兼評大審法草案相關規定。月旦法學，227，198-231。new window  延伸查詢new window
35.廖元豪(20040700)。美國憲法釋義學對我國憲法解釋之影響--正當程序、政治問題與方法論之比較。憲政時代，30(1)，1-44。  延伸查詢new window
36.蔡宗珍(20150400)。我國憲法解釋中的權力分立圖像。憲政時代，40(4)，491-558。  延伸查詢new window
37.黃昭元(20010300)。走鋼索的大法官--解讀釋字第五二○號解釋。臺灣本土法學雜誌，20，66-79。  延伸查詢new window
38.黃仁俊(20160400)。開除黨籍與司法審查--黨內民主原則的再出發。東吳法律學報，27(4)，101-132。new window  延伸查詢new window
39.Peters, Christopher J.(2000)。Assessing the New Judicial Minimalism。Columbia Law Review，100(6)，1454-1537。  new window
40.李念祖(20151000)。昨日、今日、明日，論權力分立的憲法解釋方法--以我國釋憲之政治正確意識為觀察中心。憲政時代，41(2)，179-237。  延伸查詢new window
41.林春元(20170300)。司法審查、選舉制度與民主代表性--從司法院釋字第721號解釋談起。中研院法學期刊，20，155-210。new window  延伸查詢new window
42.林春元(20120300)。法律解釋理論的重新建構--機制取徑與系統性的成本效益分析？[評Adrian Vermeule, «Judging under Uncertainty: An Institutional Theory of Legal Interpretation (在不確定下判決--法律解釋的制度理論)» (Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2006)]。臺灣民主季刊，9(1)，255-267。new window  延伸查詢new window
43.林春元(20150100)。從國會自律到政黨民主？--從九月政爭談政黨的憲政影響與規範可能。憲政時代，40(3)，273-310。  延伸查詢new window
44.張文貞(20020300)。美國司法規則制定權的理論與實際--兼評大法官釋字第五三○號解釋。臺灣本土法學雜誌，32，70-81。  延伸查詢new window
45.許宗力(20010300)。迎接立法國的到來？！--評釋字第五二○號解釋。臺灣本土法學雜誌，20，57-65。  延伸查詢new window
46.陳淳文(20020300)。從法國法論司法行政命令權。臺灣本土法學雜誌，32，107-117。  延伸查詢new window
47.陳慈陽(20140815)。評司法院大法官釋字第721號解釋。臺灣法學雜誌，254，59-76。  延伸查詢new window
48.黃昭元(20020300)。司法院的命令制定權--釋字第五三○號解釋評析。臺灣本土法學雜誌，32，82-96。  延伸查詢new window
49.楊承燁(20140900)。由憲法平等選舉原則評析我國立法委員選舉制度。中研院法學期刊，15，331-400。new window  延伸查詢new window
50.黃維幸(20071000)。從第六三二號解釋論立法院多數以程序杯葛議事。臺灣本土法學雜誌，99，108-126。  延伸查詢new window
51.詹鎮榮(20140100)。論釋憲案件之「程序參加」--以2013年版司法院大法官審理案件法修正草案為中心。憲政時代，39(3)，1-43。  延伸查詢new window
52.詹鎮榮(20160100)。總統、政黨與國會之相互關係--以政黨影響國政之憲法基礎及界限為中心。憲政時代，41(3)，421-456。  延伸查詢new window
53.賈文宇(20170300)。司法違憲審查中的證據品質與事理觀點--從證據法角度出發的美國經驗與臺灣借鏡。中研院法學期刊，20，251-308。new window  延伸查詢new window
54.蕭文生(20140715)。百分之五政黨門檻之合憲性--司法院釋字第721號解釋評析。臺灣法學雜誌，252，33-47。  延伸查詢new window
55.Booysen, Susan(2006)。The Will of the Parties versus the Will of the People? Defections, Elections and Alliances in South Africa。Party Politics，12，727-746。  new window
56.Collins, Todd A.、Cooper, Christopher A.(2012)。Case Salience and Media Coverage of Supreme Court Decisions: Toward a New Measure。Political Research Quarterly，65，396-407。  new window
57.Cornelia, Victor Ferreres(2004)。The Consequences of Centralizing Constitutional Review in a Special Court: Some Thoughts on Judicial Activism。Texas Law Review，82，1705-1736。  new window
58.Charles, Guy-Uriel E.(2007)。Democracy and Distortion。Cornell Law Review，92，601-677。  new window
59.Clark, Tom S.、R. Lax, Jeffrey、Rice, Douglas(2015)。Measuring the Political Salience of Supreme Court Cases。Journal of Law and Courts，3，37-65。  new window
60.Editorial Staff(2005)。Note: Judicial Approaches to Direct Democracy。Harvard Law Review，118，2748-2769。  new window
61.Elmendorf, Christopher S.(2007)。Advisory Counterparts to Constitutional Courts。Duke Law Journal，56，953-1045。  new window
62.Fallon, Richard H. Jr.(2010)。Jurisdiction-Stripping Reconsidered。Virginia Law Review，96，1043-1135。  new window
63.Garrett, Elizabeth(2002)。Is the Party Over? Courts and the Political Process。The Supreme Court Review，2002，95-152。  new window
64.Flanders, Chad(2007)。Bush v. Gore and the Uses of "Limiting"。Yale Law Journal，116，1159-1168。  new window
65.Foley, Edward B.(2017)。Due Process, Fair Play, and Excessive Partisanship: A New Principle for Judicial Review of Election Laws。The University of Chicago Law Review，84，655-756。  new window
66.Fishkin, Joseph(2011)。Equal Citizenship and the Individual Right to Vote。Indiana Law Journal，86，1289-1360。  new window
67.Geddis, Andrew(2002)。Gang Aft A-Gley: New Zealand's Attempt to Combat "Party Hopping" by Elected Representatives。Election Law Journal，1，557-571。  new window
68.Geddis, Andrew(2006)。Proportional Representation, "Party Hopping" and the Limits of Electoral Regulation: A Cautionary Tale from New Zealand。Common Law World Review，35，24-50。  new window
69.Gelman, Sheldon(2001)。Book Review: The Hedgehog, the Fox, and the Minimalist。Georgetown Law Journal，89，2297-2350。  new window
70.Gerken, Heather K.(2002)。The Costs and Causes of Minimalism in Voting Cases: Baker v. Carr and Its Progeny。North Carolina Law Review，80，1411-1468。  new window
71.Ginsburg, Tom(2002)。Economic Analysis and the Design of Constitutional Courts。Theoretical Inquiries in Law，3，49-185。  new window
72.Gerken, Heather K.(2004)。Lost in the Political Thicket: The Supreme Court, Election Law, and the Doctrinal Interregnum。University of Pennsylvania Law Review，153，503-540。  new window
73.Goeke, Martin、Hartmann, Christof(2011)。The Regulation of Party Switching in Africa。Journal of Contemporary African Studies，29，263-280。  new window
74.Green, Craig(2009)。An Intellectual History of Judicial Activism。Emory Law Journal，58，1195-1264。  new window
75.Hasen, Richard L.(2006)。Bad Legislative Intent。Wisconsin Law Review，2006，843-895。  new window
76.Huffman, James L.、Saathoff, MardiLyn(1990)。Advisory Opinions and Canadian Constitutional Development: The Supreme Court’s Reference Jurisdiction。Minnesota Law Review，74，1251-1336。  new window
77.Hasen, Richard L.(2013)。Shelby County and the Illusion of Minimalism。William & Mary Bill of Rights Journal，22，713-744。  new window
78.Hofer, Elise(2014)。The Case for Judicial Review of Direct Democracy。Journal of Law，4，49-63。  new window
79.Issacharoff, Samuel(2016)。Welfare: An Emerging Rule of Reason in Voting Rights Law。Indiana Law Journal，92，299-325。  new window
80.Irving, Helen(2001)。Advisory Opinions, the Rule of Law, and the Separation of Powers。Macquarie Law Journal，4，105-134。  new window
81.Issacharoff, Samuel(2001)。Private Parties with Public Purposes: Political Parties, Associational Freedoms, and Partisan Competition。Columbia Law Review，101，274-313。  new window
82.Karlan, Pamela S.(1993)。The Rights to Vote: Some Pessimism About Formalism。Texas Law Review，71，1705-1740。  new window
83.Katyal, Neal Kumar(1998)。Judges as Advicegivers。Stanford Law Review，50，1709-1824。  new window
84.Katyal, Neal Kumar、Schmidt, Thomas(2015)。Active Avoidance: The Modem Supreme Court and Legal。Harvard Law Review，128，2109-2165。  new window
85.Mikva, Abner J.(1998)。Why Judges Should Not Be Advicegivers: A Response to Professor Neal Katyal。Stanford Law Review，50，1825-1832。  new window
86.Molot, Jonathan T.(2004)。Principled Minimalism: Restriking the Balance between Judicial Minimalism and Neutral Principles。Virginia Law Review，90，1753-1847。  new window
87.Nikolenyi, Csaba(2016)。The Adoption of Anti-Defection Laws in Parliamentary Democracies。Election Law Journal，15(1)，96-108。  new window
88.Ortiz, Daniel R.(2000)。Duopoly versus Autonomy: How the Two-Party System Harms the Major Parties。Columbia Law Review，100，753-774。  new window
89.Persily, Nathaniel(2003)。Suing the Government in Hopes of Controlling It: The Evolving Justifications for Judicial Involvement in Politics。University of Pennsylvania Journal of Constitutional Law，5，607-616。  new window
90.Posner, Richard A.(2012)。The Rise and Fall of Judicial Self-Restraint。California Law Review，100，519-556。  new window
91.Pildes, Richard H.(2004)。Foreword: The Constitutionalization of Democratic Politics。Harvard Law Review，118，28-154。  new window
92.Rave, D. Theodore(2013)。Politicians as Fiduciaries。Harvard Law Review，126，671-739。  new window
93.Ryan, James E.(2006)。Book Review: Does It Take a Theory? Originalism, Active Liberty, and Minimalism。Stanford Law Review，58，1623-1660。  new window
94.Siegel, Neil S.(2005)。A Theory in Search of a Court, and Itself: Judicial Minimalism at the Supreme Court Bar。Michigan Law Review，103，1951-2019。  new window
95.Smith, Tara(2010)。Reckless Caution: The Perils of Judicial Minimalism。New York University Journal of Law & Liberty，5，347-393。  new window
96.Solimine, Michael E.(2015)。Judicial Review of Direct Democracy: A Reappraisal。Kentucky Law Journal，104，671-697。  new window
97.Sunstein, Cass R.(2006)。Problems with Minimalism。Stanford Law Review，58，1899-1918。  new window
98.Sunstein, Cass R.(2008)。Beyond Judicial Minimalism。Tulsa Law Review，43，825-842。  new window
99.Su, Yen-Tu(2016)。The Partisan Ordering of Candidacies and the Pluralism of the Law of Democracy: The Case of Taiwan。Election Law Journal，15，31-47。  new window
100.Topf, Mel A.(2001)。State Supreme Court Advisory Opinions as Illegitimate Judicial Review。The Law Review of Michigan State University, Detroit College of Law，2001，101-137。  new window
101.張文貞(20031100)。中斷的憲法對話：憲法解釋在憲法變遷脈絡的定位。國立臺灣大學法學論叢，32(6)，61-102。new window  延伸查詢new window
102.郭銘松(20010300)。違憲審查機制解決政治僵局可能性之評估--以司法院大法官針對政治部門權限爭議之解釋為中心。國立臺灣大學法學論叢，30(2)，251-289。new window  延伸查詢new window
103.蔡宗珍(20100315)。憲法疑義解釋程序之功能與存廢省思。臺灣法學雜誌，148，27-48。  延伸查詢new window
104.葉俊榮(20020300)。從「轉型法院」到「常態法院」：論大法官釋字第二六一號與第四九九號解釋的解釋風格與轉型脈絡。國立臺灣大學法學論叢，31(2)，59-96。new window  延伸查詢new window
會議論文
1.Janda, Kenneth(2009)。Laws against Party Switching, Defecting, or Floor-Crossing in National Parliaments。The 2009 World Congress of the International Political Science Association，(會議日期: July 12-16, 2009)。  new window
研究報告
1.Kędzia, Zdzislaw、Hauser, Agata(2011)。The Impact of Political Party Control over the Exercise of the Parliamentary Mandate。NY：Inter-Parliamentary Union。  new window
學位論文
1.黃建輝(1995)。違憲審查與司法造法(博士論文)。國立臺灣大學，臺北。new window  延伸查詢new window
2.Su, Yen-Tu(2010)。Political Antitrust: Rethinking the Constitutional Law of Competitive Democracy(博士論文)。Harvard Law School。  new window
圖書
1.Hirschl, Ran(2004)。Towards Juristocracy: The Origins and Consequences of the New Constitutionalism。Cambridge, Massachusetts：Harvard University Press。  new window
2.Tate, Chester Neal、Vallinder, Torbjörn(1995)。The Global Expansion of Judicial Power。New York：New York University Press。  new window
3.Przeworski, Adam(2010)。Democracy and the Limits of Self-government。Cambridge University Press。  new window
4.Hasen, Richard L.(2003)。The Supreme Court and Election Law: Judging Equality from Baker v. Carr to Bush v. Gore。New York：New York University Press。  new window
5.Shapiro, Ian(2005)。The Flight from Reality in the Human Sciences。Princeton, N.J.：Princeton University Press。  new window
6.Lindquist, Stefanie A.、Cross, Frank B.(2009)。Measuring judicial activism。New York, NY：Oxford University Press。  new window
7.Waldron, Jeremy(1999)。Law and disagreement。Oxford University Press。  new window
8.陳新民(2011)。憲法學釋論。臺北：三民書局。  延伸查詢new window
9.Sunstein, Cass R.(1999)。One Case at a Time: Judicial Minimalism on the Supreme Court。Cambridge, MA：Harvard University Press。  new window
10.吳信華(2009)。憲法訴訟專題研究（一）--「訴訟類型」。元照出版有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
11.Sweet, Alec Stone(2000)。Governing with Judges: Constitutional Politics in Europe。Oxford University Press。  new window
12.Shapiro, Ian(2003)。The State of Democratic Theory。Princeton, NJ：Princeton University Press。  new window
13.楊子慧(2008)。憲法訴訟。台北：元照出版有限公司。  延伸查詢new window
14.Posner, Richard A.(2003)。Law, Pragmatism, and Democracy。Cambridge, Massachusetts：Harverd University Press。  new window
15.林濁水(2009)。歷史劇場--痛苦執政八年。臺北：印刻。  延伸查詢new window
16.吳庚、陳淳文(2015)。憲法理論與政府體制。臺北：三民書局。new window  延伸查詢new window
17.Bellamy, Richard(2007)。Political Constitutionalism: A Republican Defence of the Constitutionality of Democracy。Cambridge：Cambridge University Press。  new window
18.Norris, Pippa(2015)。Why Elections Fail。New York：Cambridge University Press。  new window
19.Sunstein, Cass R.(1996)。Legal Reasoning and Political Conflict。New York：Oxford University Press。  new window
20.Schultz, David(2014)。Election Law and Democratic Theory。Farnham, Surrey：Ashgate Publishing Company。  new window
21.Schwartzberg, Melissa(2007)。Democracy and Legal Change。Cambridge, M.A.：Cambridge University Press。  new window
22.Thompson, Dennis F.(2002)。Just Elections: Creating a Fair Electoral Process in the United States。Chicago, I.L.：University Of Chicago Press。  new window
23.Vermeule, Adrian(2011)。The System of the Constitution。Oxford University Press。  new window
24.Vermeule, Adrian(2014)。The Constitution of Risk。New York, N.Y.：Cambridge University Press。  new window
25.Vermeule, Adrian(2006)。Judging Under Uncertainty: An Institutional Theory of Legal Interpretation。Cambridge, MA：Harvard University Press。  new window
26.Barak, Aharon(2006)。The Judge in a Democracy。Princeton, NJ：Princeton University Press。  new window
27.Tushnet, Mark V.(1999)。Taking the Constitution Away from the Courts。Princeton, NJ：Princeton University Press。  new window
28.湯德宗(2000)。權力分立新論。臺北：元照。new window  延伸查詢new window
29.Ansolabehere, Stephan、Snyder, James M. Jr.(2008)。The End of Inequality: One Person, One Vote and the Transformation of American Politics。New York, NY：W. W. Norton & Company。  new window
30.Berlin, Isaiah(1978)。The Hedgehog and the Fox: An Essay on Tolstoy's View of History。Chicago, IL：Elephant Paperbacks。  new window
31.Bickel, Alexander M.(1962)。The Least Dangerous Branch: The Supreme Court at the Bar of Politics。Binghamton, NY：Vail-Ballou Press。  new window
32.Black, Charles L. Jr.(1960)。The People and the Court: Judicial Review in a Democracy。Westport, CT：Greenwood Press。  new window
33.Chang, Wen-Chen、Thio, Li-ann、Tan, Kevin Y. L.、Yeh, Jiunn-rong(2014)。Constitutionalism in Asia: Cases and Materials。Hart Publishing。  new window
34.Gauja, Anika(2010)。Political Parties and Elections: Legislating for Representative Democracy。Farnham：Ashgate Publishing。  new window
35.Issacharoff, Samuel(2015)。Fragile Democracies: Contested Power in the Era of Constitutional Courts。New York, NY：Cambridge University Press。  new window
36.Mourtada-Sabbah, Nada、Cain, Bruce E.(2007)。The Political Question Doctrine and the Supreme Court of the United States。Lanham, MD：Lexington Books。  new window
37.Mollers, Christoph(2013)。The Three Branches: A Comparative Model of Separation of Powers。New York, NY：Oxford University Press。  new window
38.Pettit, Philip(2012)。On the People's Terms: A Republican Theory and Model of Democracy。Cambridge University Press。  new window
39.Robertson, David(2010)。The Judge as Political Theorist: Contemporary Constitutional Review。Princeton, NJ：Princeton University Press。  new window
40.Shapiro, Ian(2016)。Politics Against Domination。Cambridge, MA：Harvard University Press。  new window
41.Sunstein, Cass R.(2005)。Radicals in Robes: Why Extreme Right-Wing Courts Are Wrong for America。New York, NY：Basic Books。  new window
42.Sunstein, Cass R.(2009)。A Constitution of Many Minds: Why the Founding Document Doesn't Mean What It Meant Before。Princeton, NJ：Princeton University Press。  new window
43.Sunstein, Cass R.(2015)。Constitutional Personae: Heroes, Soldiers, Minimalists, and Mutes。New York, NY：Oxford University Press。  new window
44.Waldron, Jeremy(2016)。Political Political Theory: Essays on Institutions。Cambridge, MA：Harvard University Press。  new window
45.Ely, John Hart(1980)。Democracy and Distrust: A Theory of Judicial Review。Harvard University Press。  new window
46.Ginsburg, Tom(2003)。Judicial review in new democracies: constitutional courts in Asian cases。Cambridge University Press。  new window
其他
1.Huq, Aziz(20151125)。Book Review: A Distinctively American Doctrine，http://newrambleireview.com/bookreviews/law/a-distinctively-american-doctrine。  new window
圖書論文
1.許宗力(1999)。大法官釋憲權行使的程序及範圍--從大法官審理案件法與修正草案之檢視談起。憲法與法治國行政。臺北：元照。  延伸查詢new window
2.蘇彥圖(2007)。在權利與結構之間--初探美國民主法學的認同與典範。現代憲法的理論與現實--李鴻禧教授七秩華誕祝壽論文集。台北：元照。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.Fontana, David(2011)。Docket control and the success of constitutional courts。Comparative Constitutional Law。Edward Elgar。  new window
4.Sweet, Alec Stone(2012)。Constitutional Courts。The Oxford Handbook of Comparative Constitutional Law。Oxford：Oxford University Press。  new window
5.李建良(1999)。論司法審查的政治界限--美國「政治問題原則」初探。憲法理論與實踐。台北：學林文化。  延伸查詢new window
6.林子儀(1997)。言論自由的限制與雙軌理論。現代國家與憲法--李鴻禧教授六秩華誕祝賀論文集。臺北：元照。new window  延伸查詢new window
7.許宗力(1999)。憲法與政治。憲法與法治國行政。臺北：元照出版公司。  延伸查詢new window
8.林明鏘(2007)。大法官之憲法解釋與憲法續造。現代憲法的理論與現實--李鴻禧教授七秩華誕祝壽論文集。臺北：元照。new window  延伸查詢new window
9.黃錦堂(2007)。論當前的行憲政策與憲法解釋。憲法理論與實務。臺北：中研院中山人文社會科學研究所。  延伸查詢new window
10.黃舒芃(2009)。憲法解釋的「法適用」性格--從德國公法上法學方法論傳統對「法適用」與「法制訂」的區分探討聯邦憲法法院解釋活動的本質。民主國家的憲法及其守護者。台北：元照。  延伸查詢new window
11.Gerken, Heather K.、Kang, Michael S.(2011)。The Institutional Turn in Election Law Scholarship。Race, Reform, and Regulation of the Electoral Process: Recurring Puzzles in American Democracy。Cambridge University Press。  new window
12.林超駿(2006)。略論司法院大法官聲請外解釋之作為。超越繼受之憲法學：理想與現實。臺北：元照。  延伸查詢new window
13.李念祖(2000)。大法官釋憲功能的立法化抑或審判化？--從憲法增修條文第五條第四項看政治民主化的一個基本問題。司法者的憲法。臺北：五南。  延伸查詢new window
14.李念祖(2013)。權力分立制度之違憲審查基準初探--我國與美國憲法案例之對照觀察。司法者的憲法。臺北：元照。  延伸查詢new window
15.李念祖(2013)。純規範控制的憲政難題--從釋字第五七二號補充釋字第三七一號解釋談起。司法者的憲法。臺北：元照。new window  延伸查詢new window
16.李建良(1999)。政治問題與司法審查--試評司法院大法官相關解釋。憲法理論與實踐。臺北：學林文化。new window  延伸查詢new window
17.李惠宗(2004)。從政黨平等原則論單一選區兩票制。法治與現代行政法學：法治斌教授紀念論文集。臺北：元照。new window  延伸查詢new window
18.李建良(2007)。政黨比例代表制與選舉平等原則--以德國聯邦眾議院選舉制度為例。憲法理論與實踐。臺北：學林文化。  延伸查詢new window
19.林子儀(2002)。憲政體制問題釋憲方法之應用--美國聯邦最高法院審理權力分立案件之解釋方法。新世紀經濟法制之建構與挑戰--廖義男教授六秩誕辰祝壽論文集。臺北：元昭。  延伸查詢new window
20.翁岳生(2009)。憲法之維護者--省思與期許（主題演說）。憲法解釋之理論與實務。臺北：中央研究院法律學研究所籌備處。  延伸查詢new window
21.張嘉尹(2002)。憲法解釋、憲法理論與「結果考量」--憲法解釋方法論的問題。憲法解釋之理論與實務。臺北：中央研究院法律學研究所籌備處。  延伸查詢new window
22.許宗力(2006)。違憲審查程序之事實調查。法與國家權力。臺北：元照。  延伸查詢new window
23.陳英鈐(2004)。大法官會議對憲法解釋之程序標的與拘束力--從憲法主義與法律主義談起。憲政民主與人權。臺北：學林。  延伸查詢new window
24.陳愛娥(2004)。違憲審查與司法政策的關係--由程序法的觀點評論司法院大法官釋字第五三〇號解釋。法治與現代行政法學：法治斌教授紀念論文集。臺北：元照。new window  延伸查詢new window
25.陳淑芳(2011)。德國之國會調查權。權力劃分與權限歸屬學術論文集。臺北：元照。  延伸查詢new window
26.黃舒芃(2009)。The Countermajoritarian Difficulty Revisited--An Examination of Bickel's Theory of Judicial Review from Dworkin's Perspective。民主國家的憲法及其守護者。臺北：元照。  延伸查詢new window
27.黃舒芃(2009)。從普通法背景檢討美國司法違憲審查正當性的題。民主國家的憲法及其守護者。臺北：元照。  延伸查詢new window
28.黃昭元(2002)。司法消極美德的積極實踐--評Sunstein教授的「司法最小主義」理論。當代公法新論(上)--翁岳生教授七秩誕辰祝壽論文集。臺北：元照。new window  延伸查詢new window
29.葉俊榮(2003)。從國家發展與憲法變遷論大法官的解釋機能：1949-1998。民主轉型與憲法變遷。臺北：元照。  延伸查詢new window
30.蘇永欽(1994)。合憲法律解釋原則--從功能法上考量其運作界限與效力問題。合憲性控制的理論與實際。臺北：元照。  延伸查詢new window
31.蘇永欽(2008)。大法官解釋政府體制的方法。尋找共和國。臺北：元照。new window  延伸查詢new window
32.蘇彥圖(2017)。憲政民主的死人之手問題--憲法規範權威的初步反省。憲法解釋之理論與實務（九）--憲政主義與人權理論的移植與深耕。臺北：中央研究院法律學研究所。  延伸查詢new window
33.Cox, Adam B.(2005)。Partisan Gerrymandering and Disaggregated Redistricting。Supreme Court Review. 2004。  new window
34.Ferejohn, John、Pasquino, Pasquale(2012)。Constitutional Adjudication, Italian Style。Comparative Constitutional Design。New York, NY：Cambridge University Press。  new window
35.Ginsburg, Tom(2012)。[Comparative Constitutional Design]Introduction。Comparative Constitutional Design。New York, NY：Cambridge University Press。  new window
36.Hasen, Richard L.(2011)。Judges as Political Regulators: Evidence and Options for Institutional Change。Race, Reform, and Regulation of the Electoral Process: Recurring Puzzles in American Democracy。New York, NY：Cambridge University Press。  new window
37.Michelman, Frank I.(1998)。Constitutional Authorship。Constitutionalism: Philosophical Foundations。Cambridge, MA：Cambridge University Press。  new window
38.Lowenstein, Daniel H.(2000)。The Supreme Court Has No Theory of Politics--and Be Thankful for Small Favors。The U.S. Supreme Court and the Electoral Process。Washington, DC：Georgetown University Press。  new window
39.Pildes, Richard H.(2002)。Constitutionalizing Democratic Politics。A Badly Flawed Election: Debating Bush v. Gore, the Supreme Court, and American Democracy。New York, NY：The New Press。  new window
40.Sykes, Diane S.(2015)。Minimalism and Its Limits。Cato Supreme Court Review: 2014-2015。Washington, DC：Cato Institute。  new window
41.Vermeule, Adrian(2012)。Collective Wisdom and Institutional Design。Collective Wisdom: Principles and Mechanisms。New York, NY：Cambridge University Press。  new window
42.張文貞、葉俊榮(2005)。邁向憲政主義：憲政體制的變遷與解釋。憲法解釋之理論與實務。臺北：中央研究院法律學研究所籌備處。new window  延伸查詢new window
43.黃昭元(2002)。抗多數困境與違憲審查正當性--評Bickel教授的違憲審查理論。臺灣憲法之縱剖橫切。臺北：元照。  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

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫

目前上線人數：1315（臺灣：1291，外國：24） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1586744 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67399406
國家圖書館著作權聲明 Copyright © 2013 All rights reserved.
本館地址: 100201臺北市中山南路20號． 本館地圖及交通資訊．
總機：(02)23619132．最佳瀏覽解析度為1024x768以上