宪法解释的“第三条道路”--伊利和德沃金的宪法解释理论之比较

On "the Third Way" of Interpreting the Constitution——Comparison of Ely and Dworkin on Their Theories of Constitution Interpretation

美国200余年的制宪、释宪史为宪法解释提供了丰厚的制度土壤,形成了林林总总的宪法解释理论。贯穿其中的则是宪法解释的合理性与确定性之间的平衡问题,在这个问题上形成了较为极端的"解释主义"与"非解释主义"之争。作为对这二者的超越,伊利和德沃金分别提出了各自的宪法解释的"第三条道路",前者可称为宪法解释的"程序"模式,后者则为"原则"模式。二者自觉地将宪法解释问题与民主观联系起来,从而将宪法解释的方法论推至一个更为丰富与抽象的层次。

America enjoyed a history of two centuries in drafting and interpreting the Constitution, which offered ample experience for theories on interpretation of the Constitution, among which the balance between reasonable and specific principles of interpreting is the main theme. Thus the debate upon the ＂interpretivism＂ and ＂non-interpretivism＂ is extremely hot. However beyond such debate, Ely and Dworkin put forward respectively ＂a third way＂ for interpreting the Constitution, with the former named ＂procedure＂ pattern and the latter ＂principle＂ pattern. Both patterns combine the interpretation of Constitution and the outlook of democracy, which update the methodology of Constitution interpretation to a more advanced and abstract level.