美国早期针对联邦司法机构的批评

The Criticisms against the Federal Judiciary in Early U.S.History

从现代国家的视角来看,美国联邦司法机构的存在和扩张是理所当然的。在实践中日益完善的全国性法律体系能够满足国家的各种需求,维护法治与公平正义。这一历史进程就是“进步”与“发展”,值得称赞。但实际的历史演变却存在更多的复杂性和不确定性。从批准宪法时期的辩论开始,联邦宪法的反对者就怀疑联邦司法机构。他们相信联邦法院会不断推动权力的集中。况且普通公民很难完全理解法律语言,最高法院法官又不受人民的直接控制,人民的权利和州的主权都将受到联邦法院的危害。这一时期,反对者有着普遍的担忧与恐惧,他们却没能阻止联邦司法机构的建立。此后,州政府抵制联邦法院的判决成为新的斗争形式。通过研究反对者的批评意见,我们可以从不同的角度理解美国早期的联邦司法机构。

From the perspective of the modern state,the existence and expansion of the American federal judiciary is taken for granted.The improving national judicial system would satisfy various needs of the nation.Meanwhile it could maintain the rule of law and guarantee fairness and justice.Such historical process was usually called progress and somewhat worthy of praise.However,the actual history was much more complex and uncertain.In the ratification debates,the opponents of federal constitution were very suspicious of the federal judiciary.They believed that the federal courts would promote the centralization of power.Furthermore,it was difficult for ordinary citizens to completely comprehend the language of law.They also could not directly control Supreme Court judges.In general,opponents were afraid that the federal courts would injure both the rights of people and state sovereignty.Though with fierce resistance,they finally failed to prevent the establishment of federal judiciary.Since then,the state governments opposing the judgments of federal courts became the new form of struggles.By studying the criticisms from opponents,we can understand the federal judiciary of the early U.S.history from a different angle.