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：從Roe v. Wade的推翻爭議看美國憲法判決先例拘束原則的辯論
書刊名：國立臺灣大學法學論叢
作者：駱怡辰
作者(外文)：Lo, Yi-chen
出版日期：2022
卷期：51:2
頁次：頁261-333
主題關鍵詞：判決先例拘束原則；原意主義；憲法判決先例；墮胎權；判決一致性；法治原則；Stare decisis；Originalism；Constitutional precedents；Abortion rights；Judicial consistency；Rule of law
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:64
  • 點閱點閱:3
期刊論文
1.Sinclair, Michael(2007)。Precedent, Super-Precedent。George Mason Law Review，14(2)，363-411。  new window
2.Paulsen, Michael Stokes(2000)。Abrogating Stare Decisis by Statute: May Congress Remove the Precedential Effect of Roe and Casey?。The Yale Law Journal，109(7)，1535-1602。  new window
3.陳宜倩(20130900)。尊重生命尊嚴、墮胎權與女性人權之論述生產與社會變革：美國最高法院Gonzales v. Carhart一案評析。歐美研究，43(3)，595-635。new window  延伸查詢new window
4.張志明(20020700)。由美國聯邦最高法院與德國聯邦憲法法院墮胎判決論國家義務之不同觀點--憲法權利之消極性與積極性。憲政時代，28(1)，110-130。  延伸查詢new window
5.蘇永欽(19820600)。試論判決的法源性。政大法學評論，25，179-212。new window  延伸查詢new window
6.彭鳳至(20081000)。司法院大法官憲法解釋之效力--兼論大法官憲法解釋一般拘束力與德國聯邦憲法法院法第三一條規定德國聯邦憲法法院裁判之效力。月旦法學，161，105-134。new window  延伸查詢new window
7.雷文玫(20070300)。人類胚胎的法律地位：為何人類胚胎不應該是權利主體？。人文及社會科學集刊，19(1)，51-91。new window  延伸查詢new window
8.陳愛娥(19971200)。憲法對未出生胎兒的保護--作為基本權保護義務的一例來觀察。政大法學評論，58，65-82。new window  延伸查詢new window
9.Burton, Steven J.(2014)。The Conflict Between Stare Decisis and Overruling in Constitutional Adjudication。Cardozo Law Review，35(5)，1687-1713。  new window
10.Fallon, Richard H. Jr.(1997)。"The Rule of Law" as a Concept in Constitutional Discourse。Columbia Law Review，97(1)，1-56。  new window
11.Fallon, Richard H. Jr.(2001)。Stare Decisis and the Constitution: An Essay on Constitutional Methodology。New York University Law Review，76(2)，570-597。  new window
12.Gerhardt, Michael J.(2006)。Super Precedent。Minnesota Law Review，90(5)，1204-1231。  new window
13.Ely, John Hart(1973)。The Wages of Crying Wolf: A Comment on Roe v. Wade。The Yale Law Journal，82(5)，920-949。  new window
14.吳從周(20100600)。試論判例作為民法第1條之習慣法：為我國判例制度而辯護。國立臺灣大學法學論叢，39(2)，227-299。new window  延伸查詢new window
15.Goodhart, Arthur L.(1930)。Determining the Ratio Decidendi of a Case。Yale Law Journal，40(2)，161-183。  new window
16.Whittington, Keith E.(2004)。The New Originalism。Georgetown Journal of Law and Public Policy，2(2)，599-613。  new window
17.莊世同(20170600)。生命、自主與尊嚴--對德沃金墮胎論證的審視與反思。臺北大學法學論叢，102，29-72。new window  延伸查詢new window
18.廖義男(20191200)。公務人員年金改革司法院釋字第782號解釋之評析。月旦法學，295，5-16。new window  延伸查詢new window
19.李念祖(20140100)。以先例尊重替代判例拘束--從大法官釋字第687號解釋談起。法令月刊，65(1)，60-68。new window  延伸查詢new window
20.徐良維(20140500)。補充解釋與大法官解釋效力之關連性--評司法院釋字第六八六號解釋。全國律師，18(5)，89-105。  延伸查詢new window
21.王偉霖(20180914)。論英美法判決先例原則之運作--兼論我國現行作法及大法庭制度。臺灣法學雜誌，351，82-97。  延伸查詢new window
22.林更盛(20181200)。大法官釋字第748號解釋的拘束力--方法論的觀點。月旦法學，283，5-19。new window  延伸查詢new window
23.Alexander, L.(1989)。Constrained by precedent。Southern California Law Review，63(1)，1-64。  new window
24.Barnett, R. E.(2005)。Trumping precedent with original meaning: not as radical as it Sounds。Constitutional Commentary，22(2)，257-270。  new window
25.Barnett, R. E.(2006)。It's a bird, it's a plane, no, it's super precedent: a response to Farber and Gerhardt。Minnesota Law Review，90(5)，1232-1251。  new window
26.Barrett, A. C.(2003)。Stare decisis and due process。University of Colorado Law Review，74(3)，1011-1076。  new window
27.Calabresi, S. G.(2005)。Text, precedent, and the constitution: some originalist and normative arguments for overruling Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pennsylvania v. Casey。Constitutional Commentary，22(2)，311-348。  new window
28.Dorf, M. C.(1994)。Dicta and Article III。University of Pennsylvania Law Review，142(6)，1997-2069。  new window
29.Fallon, R. H. Jr.(2008)。Constitutional precedent viewed through the lens of Hartian positivist jurisprudence。North Carolina Law Review，86(5)，1107-1164。  new window
30.Fried, C.(1994)。Reply to Lawson。Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy，17(1)，35-38。  new window
31.Gerhardt, M. J.(1991)。The role of precedent in constitutional decisionmaking and theory。George Washington Law Review，60(1)，68-159。  new window
32.Gerhardt, M. J.(1993)。The pressure of precedent: a critique of the conservative approaches to stare decisis in abortion cases。Constitutional Commentary，10(1)，67-86。  new window
33.Greenhouse, L.、Siegel, R. B.(2011)。Before (and after) Roe v. Wade: new questions about backlash。Yale Law Journal，120(8)，2028-2087。  new window
34.Harrison, J.(2000)。The power of congress over the rules of precedent。Duke Law Journal，50(2)，503-543。  new window
35.Kozel, R. J.(2013)。The rule of law and the perils of precedent。Michigan Law Review First Impressions，111，37-45。  new window
36.Kurland, P. B.(1979)。"Brown v. Board of Education was the beginning": the school desegregation cases in the United States Supreme Court: 1954-1979。Washington University Law Quarterly，1979(2)，309-406。  new window
37.Lawson, G.(1994)。The constitutional case against precedent。Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy，17(1)，23-34。  new window
38.Lawson, G.(2001)。Controlling precedent: congressional regulation of judicial decision-making。Constitutional Commentary，18(1)，191-229。  new window
39.Lawson, G.(2007)。Mostly unconstitutional: the case against precedent revisited。Ave Maria Law Review，5(1)，1-22。  new window
40.Lee, T. R.(1999)。Stare decisis in historical perspective: from the founding era to the Rehnquist Court。Vanderbilt Law Review，52(3)，645-735。  new window
41.Maltz, E. M.(1980)。Some thoughts on the death of Stare Decisis in constitutional law。Wisconsin Law Review，1980(3)，467-496。  new window
42.Meese, E.(1987)。The law of the constitution。Tulane Law Review，61(5)，979-990。  new window
43.Merrill, T. W.(2005)。Originalism, stare decisis and the promotion of judicial restraint。Constitutional Commentary，22(2)，271-288。  new window
44.Paulsen, M. S.(1996)。Captain James T. Kirk and the enterprise of constitutional interpretation: some modest proposals from the twenty-third century。Albany Law Review，59(2)，671-692。  new window
45.Noland, J. D.(1969)。Stare decisis and the overruling of constitutional decisions in the Warren years。Valparaiso University Law Review，4(1)，101-135。  new window
46.Paulsen, M. S.(2001)。Lawson's awesome (also wrong, some)。Constitutional Commentary，18(1)，231-242。  new window
47.Rehnquist, J. C.(1986)。The power that shall be vested in precedent: stare decisis, the constitution and the supreme court。Boston University Law Review，66(2)，345-376。  new window
48.Schauer, F.(1994)。Precedent and the necessary externality of constitutional norms。Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy，17(1)，45-56。  new window
49.Schauer, F.(2007)。Has precedent ever really mattered in the Supreme Court?。Georgia State University law review，24(2)，381-402。  new window
50.Stevens, J. P.(1983)。The life span of a judge-made rule。New York University Law Review，58(1)，1-21。  new window
51.Sunstein, C. R.(1991)。Three civil rights fallacies。California Law Review，79(3)，751-774。  new window
52.Waldron, J.(2012)。Stare decisis and the rule of law: a layered approach。Michigan Law Review，111(1)，1-31。  new window
53.Witherspoon, J. P.(1976)。The new pro-life legislation: patterns and recommendations。St. Mary's Law Journal，7(4)，637-697。  new window
54.Ziegler, M.(2014)。Beyond backlash: legal history, polarization, and Roe v. Wade。Washington and Lee Law Review，71(2)，969-1024。  new window
圖書
1.Eisenberg, M. A.(1988)。The nature of the Common Law。Harvard University Press。  new window
2.Dworkin, Ronald(1986)。Law's Empire。Hart Publishing。  new window
3.Duxbury, Neil(2008)。The Nature and Authority of Precedent。Cambridge：Cambridge University Press。  new window
4.Hart, Herbert L. A.(1994)。The Concept of Law。Oxford University Press。  new window
5.Bork, R. H.(1990)。The tempting of America: The political seduction of the law。  new window
6.Hull, N. E. H.、Hoffer, P. C.(2001)。Roe v. Wade: the Abortion Rights Controversy in American History。University Press of Kansas。  new window
7.Levy, L. W.(1974)。Against the law: the Nixon Court and criminal justice。Harper & Row。  new window
8.Munson, Z. W.(2008)。The making of pro-life activists: how social movement mobilization works。University of Chicago Press。  new window
9.Raz, J.(2011)。The authority of law。Oxford University Press。  new window
10.Ziegler, M.(2015)。After Roe: the lost history of the abortion debate。Harvard University Press。  new window
11.Ziegler, M.(2020)。Abortion and the law in America: Roe v. Wade to the present。Cambridge University Press。  new window
12.Scalia, Antonin、Gutmann, Amy(1997)。A Matter of Interpretation: Federal Courts and The Law。Princeton University Press。  new window
13.Rosenberg, G. N.(1993)。The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring About Social Change。University of Chicago。  new window
圖書論文
1.許忠信(2010)。法源--判例法。英美法導論。元照出版公司。  延伸查詢new window
2.吳信華(20020000)。論大法官釋憲程序中的「補充解釋」。當代公法新論：翁岳生教授七秩誕辰祝壽論文集。元照。new window  延伸查詢new window
3.林利芝(2010)。[英美法導論]概論。英美法導論。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
 
無相關點閱
 
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：349（臺灣：347，外國：2） ／ 本年度總使用人次：1498098 ／ 訪客人次（自102年09月）：67296045
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