司法审查的迷雾——马伯里诉麦迪逊案的政治哲学意涵

The Mist Surrounding Judicial Review

美国法律传统最重要的特色之一是确立了司法机关作为宪法最终解释者的司法主权原则,而1804年的马伯里诉麦迪逊案则因为最早确立了司法审查原则而成为这一传统的象征。在该案中,最高法院大法官马歇尔充分运用其高超的政治智慧和精湛的法律技艺,将政治斗争转化为法律原则的斗争,以政治上法官任命的失败为代价赢得了司法审查原则确立的胜利。在此后的一个多世纪中,纠结于人民主权与司法独立、代议民主与持久价值、大众激情与审慎理性等多项宪政议题,该案被不断地解释和再解释,最后完成了从司法审查原则到司法主权原则的提升,确立了美国特色的、司法至上的法律传统。而对这一过程的解读与梳理,有助于祛除法律神话中的迷雾,增进法律科学智识的理性与自主。

One of the important characteristics of the American legal tradition is the principle of judicial sovereignty whereby the judicial organs are the ultimate interpreter of the Constitution. The decision in the 1804 Marbury v. Madison case, by establishing the principle of judicial review, has become the symbol of this tradition. During the century that followed, through the continuous interpretation and reinterpretation of this decision, the US has transformed the principle of judicial review into the principle of judicial sovereignty and established the legal tradition of supremacy of the judiciary. Understanding this process will help us dispel the mist surrounding judicial review and enhance the rationality and autonomy of the legal science.