建设性的宪法历史和今天的人身保护令

IF 2.2 2区社会学 Q1 LAW

California Law Review Pub Date : 2019-01-01 DOI:10.15779/Z38XW47W75

James E. Pfander

{"title":"建设性的宪法历史和今天的人身保护令","authors":"James E. Pfander","doi":"10.15779/Z38XW47W75","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In her book, Habeas Corpus in Wartime: From the Tower of London to Guantanamo Bay, Professor Amanda Tyler has written a definitive constitutional history of the habeas privilege in the United States.1 Rather than rehearsing the book’s many virtues, I propose to devote this short Essay to the familiar yet intractable problem of historical translation. The problem of how to translate the lessons of history into modern constitutional law remains largely unresolved.2 True, almost everyone would agree with originalists that history can help answer some modern interpretive questions.3 But just about everyone also recognizes that relevant history does not always point in one direction: well-informed observers may dispute the historical meaning of a constitution’s text, and their views may conflict with the way the","PeriodicalId":51452,"journal":{"name":"California Law Review","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2019-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Constructive constitutional history and habeas corpus today\",\"authors\":\"James E. Pfander\",\"doi\":\"10.15779/Z38XW47W75\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In her book, Habeas Corpus in Wartime: From the Tower of London to Guantanamo Bay, Professor Amanda Tyler has written a definitive constitutional history of the habeas privilege in the United States.1 Rather than rehearsing the book’s many virtues, I propose to devote this short Essay to the familiar yet intractable problem of historical translation. The problem of how to translate the lessons of history into modern constitutional law remains largely unresolved.2 True, almost everyone would agree with originalists that history can help answer some modern interpretive questions.3 But just about everyone also recognizes that relevant history does not always point in one direction: well-informed observers may dispute the historical meaning of a constitution’s text, and their views may conflict with the way the\",\"PeriodicalId\":51452,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"California Law Review\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2019-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"California Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38XW47W75\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"California Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15779/Z38XW47W75","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

在她的书《战时的人身保护令:从伦敦塔到关塔那摩湾》中，阿曼达·泰勒教授写了一部关于美国人身保护权的权威宪法史。与其重述这本书的诸多优点，我建议在这篇短文中讨论一个熟悉但棘手的历史翻译问题。如何将历史教训转化为现代宪法的问题在很大程度上仍未解决的确，几乎每个人都会同意原初主义者的观点，即历史可以帮助回答一些现代解释性问题但几乎每个人都认识到，相关的历史并不总是指向一个方向:消息灵通的观察家可能会对宪法文本的历史意义提出异议，他们的观点可能与宪法文本的方式相冲突

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Constructive constitutional history and habeas corpus today

In her book, Habeas Corpus in Wartime: From the Tower of London to Guantanamo Bay, Professor Amanda Tyler has written a definitive constitutional history of the habeas privilege in the United States.1 Rather than rehearsing the book’s many virtues, I propose to devote this short Essay to the familiar yet intractable problem of historical translation. The problem of how to translate the lessons of history into modern constitutional law remains largely unresolved.2 True, almost everyone would agree with originalists that history can help answer some modern interpretive questions.3 But just about everyone also recognizes that relevant history does not always point in one direction: well-informed observers may dispute the historical meaning of a constitution’s text, and their views may conflict with the way the

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

California Law Review LAW-

CiteScore

2.70

自引率

8.30%

发文量

期刊介绍： This review essay considers the state of hybrid democracy in California through an examination of three worthy books: Daniel Weintraub, Party of One: Arnold Schwarzenegger and the Rise of the Independent Voter; Center for Governmental Studies, Democracy by Initiative: Shaping California"s Fourth Branch of Government (Second Edition), and Mark Baldassare and Cheryl Katz, The Coming of Age of Direct Democracy: California"s Recall and Beyond. The essay concludes that despite the hoopla about Governor Schwarzenegger as a "party of one" and a new age of "hybrid democracy" in California.