是图谋垄断,还是行使宪法权利——从律师联盟案看美国宪法权利的冲突与协调

Are They Conspiring to Monopoly,or Exerting Their Constitutional Rights?——On Conflict and Harmony of the Constitutional Rights in U.S. from Superior Court Trial Lawyers ASS'N

“吉迪恩案”中 ,联邦最高法院赋予了“穷人有获取刑事法律援助的宪法权利” ;“尼诺案”中 ,最高法院又确立了“公民享有要求政府采取公共行动的宪法权利 ,不论这一权利的行使是否有违法之目的 ,也不论其行为是单一行动还是一致行动 ,都不受反垄断法的管辖。”律师联盟案中 ,这两种宪法权利发生了冲突 ,最高法院最终选择了优先保护社会弱者的权利。

In Gideon, the Supreme Court of U.S. recognized that “the poor have a right, grounded in the First Amendment, to receive legal aid in crime case.” A lso in Noerr, the Supreme Court decided “individuals have a Constitutional Right to petition the government for taking public action. This right is exempt from the Antitrust Laws no matter how anticompetitive the petitioners' intent, and whether they conduct the petitioning singly or in concert.” When the two rights were conflicted in the case of Superior Court Trial Lawyers ASS'N, the poor's right was selected to be protected by the Court.