立法至上主义消亡?

Adam Cox, Cristina M. Rodríguez
{"title":"立法至上主义消亡?","authors":"Adam Cox, Cristina M. Rodríguez","doi":"10.1093/oso/9780190694364.003.0008","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This chapter evaluates a central critique of the President’s power to make policy through enforcement, embodied in Justice Anthony Kennedy’s exclamation that President Obama’s relief initiatives would have turned the government “upside down.” This worry that the Executive might transform its authority to enforce the law into a legislative power that belongs to Congress is misplaced. The history of presidential immigration law underscores why. After demonstrating the impossibility of constraining enforcement judgments through a lawyerly search through the immigration code for congressional priorities, the chapter then explains and defends a two-principals model of decision-making, using the terms of contemporary separation of powers theory. The governance in which the Executive engages as a co-principal in the formulation of immigration policy provides a vital complement to the legislature, not only by checking legislative excess and adapting the legal regime in response to the effects of the law on the ground, but also by expanding possibilities for democratic engagement and policymaking within an otherwise sluggish system.","PeriodicalId":170336,"journal":{"name":"The President and Immigration Law","volume":"312 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Wither Legislative Supremacy?\",\"authors\":\"Adam Cox, Cristina M. Rodríguez\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/oso/9780190694364.003.0008\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This chapter evaluates a central critique of the President’s power to make policy through enforcement, embodied in Justice Anthony Kennedy’s exclamation that President Obama’s relief initiatives would have turned the government “upside down.” This worry that the Executive might transform its authority to enforce the law into a legislative power that belongs to Congress is misplaced. The history of presidential immigration law underscores why. After demonstrating the impossibility of constraining enforcement judgments through a lawyerly search through the immigration code for congressional priorities, the chapter then explains and defends a two-principals model of decision-making, using the terms of contemporary separation of powers theory. The governance in which the Executive engages as a co-principal in the formulation of immigration policy provides a vital complement to the legislature, not only by checking legislative excess and adapting the legal regime in response to the effects of the law on the ground, but also by expanding possibilities for democratic engagement and policymaking within an otherwise sluggish system.\",\"PeriodicalId\":170336,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The President and Immigration Law\",\"volume\":\"312 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The President and Immigration Law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190694364.003.0008\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The President and Immigration Law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780190694364.003.0008","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本章评估了对总统通过强制执行制定政策的权力的核心批评,体现在大法官安东尼·肯尼迪(Anthony Kennedy)的感叹中,即奥巴马总统的救济计划将使政府“颠倒”。这种担心行政部门可能会将其执法权力转变为属于国会的立法权是错误的。总统移民法的历史凸显了其中的原因。在论证了通过律师在移民法典中查找国会优先事项来限制执法判决的不可能性之后,本章接着使用当代三权分立理论的术语解释并捍卫了一种双重原则的决策模式。行政部门作为共同负责人参与制定移民政策的治理,为立法机构提供了至关重要的补充,不仅通过检查立法过度和调整法律制度以应对法律在实地的影响,而且还通过扩大民主参与和决策的可能性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Wither Legislative Supremacy?
This chapter evaluates a central critique of the President’s power to make policy through enforcement, embodied in Justice Anthony Kennedy’s exclamation that President Obama’s relief initiatives would have turned the government “upside down.” This worry that the Executive might transform its authority to enforce the law into a legislative power that belongs to Congress is misplaced. The history of presidential immigration law underscores why. After demonstrating the impossibility of constraining enforcement judgments through a lawyerly search through the immigration code for congressional priorities, the chapter then explains and defends a two-principals model of decision-making, using the terms of contemporary separation of powers theory. The governance in which the Executive engages as a co-principal in the formulation of immigration policy provides a vital complement to the legislature, not only by checking legislative excess and adapting the legal regime in response to the effects of the law on the ground, but also by expanding possibilities for democratic engagement and policymaking within an otherwise sluggish system.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Sidelining the States The Diplomatic Origins of Immigration Law Managing and Manufacturing Crisis Controlling the Enforcement Bureaucracy Wither Legislative Supremacy?
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1