|
In the United States, strict constructionism refers to a particular legal philosophy of judicial interpretation that limits or restricts judicial interpretation. == Strict sense of the term == Strict construction requires a judge to apply the text only as it is written. Once the court has a clear meaning of the text, no further investigation is required. Judges—in this view—should avoid drawing inferences from a statute or constitution and focus only on the text itself.〔 "(The Judiciary: The Power of the Federal Judiciary )", The Social Studies Help Center 〕 Justice Hugo Black (1886-1973) argued that the First Amendment's injunction, that ''Congress shall make no law'' (against certain civil rights), should be construed strictly: ''no law'', thought Black, admits ''no exceptions''. (Ironically, Black has a reputation as a judicial activist.〔 "(Supreme Court, United States )", Questia.com "The judicial activist wing, led by Justices Hugo L. Black and William O. Douglas..." 〕) However, "strict construction" is not a synonym for textualism or originalism. Antonin Scalia, a major proponent of originalism, has said that "no one ought to be" a strict constructionist. The term often contrasts with the phrase "judicial activism", used to describe judges who seek to enact legislation through court rulings, although the two terms are not actually opposites. 抄文引用元・出典: フリー百科事典『 ウィキペディア（Wikipedia）』 ■ウィキペディアで「strict constructionism」の詳細全文を読む スポンサード リンク
|