论文部分内容阅读
从法学方法论上说,法律规范并非对事实的陈述,而是规范的表达,因此目的论在法律适用当中具有重要的意义。美国最高法院在纽约时报及其后续案件中,并没有将自己局限于对制宪者原意的追寻,而是致力于对宪法规范的客观目的的论证,并宣告了适用于公共官员的实际恶意规则。随后它又基于宪法规范的客观目的,将实际恶意规则类推适用于公众人物,从而最终完成了对传统诽谤法规则的宪法改造。这显示了美国最高法院对运用目的论思考方式的高度自觉。
From legal methodology, legal norms are not statements of fact, but rather normative expressions, so Skopos theory is of great significance in the application of law. In the New York Times and its successors, the Supreme Court of the United States did not limit itself to pursuing the original intention of the constitutionalists, but instead endeavored to demonstrate the objective objective of constitutional norms and proclaimed the actual malicious rules applicable to public officials . Subsequently, based on the objective objective of the constitutional norms, it applied the analogy of actual malicious rules to public figures and finally completed the constitutional reform of the traditional rules of defamation. This shows that the Supreme Court of the United States is highly conscious of the way it uses teleological thinking.