立法授权、一元制总统制与行政国家的合法性

IF 0.6 4区 社会学 Q2 LAW Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy Pub Date : 2010-01-01 DOI:10.31228/osf.io/zyqrd
P. Shane
{"title":"立法授权、一元制总统制与行政国家的合法性","authors":"P. Shane","doi":"10.31228/osf.io/zyqrd","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This essay focuses on the relationship between non-delegation doctrine and so-called unitary executive theory. It argues that, if the Supreme Court were to embrace unitary executive theory without, as is highly unlikely, tightening up on the non-delegation doctrine, the result would be a constitutional disaster in terms of reduced executive branch legal and political accountability. Increasing the legitimacy of the administrative state ought to involve more, not fewer mechanisms that subject the exercise of presidential power to effective checks and balances.","PeriodicalId":46083,"journal":{"name":"Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2010-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Legislative Delegation, the Unitary Presidency, and the Legitimacy of the Administrative State\",\"authors\":\"P. Shane\",\"doi\":\"10.31228/osf.io/zyqrd\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This essay focuses on the relationship between non-delegation doctrine and so-called unitary executive theory. It argues that, if the Supreme Court were to embrace unitary executive theory without, as is highly unlikely, tightening up on the non-delegation doctrine, the result would be a constitutional disaster in terms of reduced executive branch legal and political accountability. Increasing the legitimacy of the administrative state ought to involve more, not fewer mechanisms that subject the exercise of presidential power to effective checks and balances.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46083,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2010-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"90\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.31228/osf.io/zyqrd\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"社会学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"LAW\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy","FirstCategoryId":"90","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.31228/osf.io/zyqrd","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"社会学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"LAW","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

本文主要研究非授权理论与所谓的统一执行理论之间的关系。它认为,如果最高法院接受单一行政理论,而不收紧非授权原则(这是极不可能的),那么就减少行政部门的法律和政治责任而言,结果将是一场宪法灾难。提高行政国家的合法性应该包括更多而不是更少的机制,使总统权力的行使受到有效的制衡。
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
Legislative Delegation, the Unitary Presidency, and the Legitimacy of the Administrative State
This essay focuses on the relationship between non-delegation doctrine and so-called unitary executive theory. It argues that, if the Supreme Court were to embrace unitary executive theory without, as is highly unlikely, tightening up on the non-delegation doctrine, the result would be a constitutional disaster in terms of reduced executive branch legal and political accountability. Increasing the legitimacy of the administrative state ought to involve more, not fewer mechanisms that subject the exercise of presidential power to effective checks and balances.
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
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy is published three times annually by the Harvard Society for Law & Public Policy, Inc., an organization of Harvard Law School students. The Journal is one of the most widely circulated student-edited law reviews and the nation’s leading forum for conservative and libertarian legal scholarship. The late Stephen Eberhard and former Senator and Secretary of Energy E. Spencer Abraham founded the journal twenty-eight years ago and many journal alumni have risen to prominent legal positions in the government and at the nation’s top law firms.
期刊最新文献
The Presumption of Constitutionality Immigration, Freedom, and the Constitution Business Transactions and President Trump's 'Emoluments' Problem Free Expression on Campus: Mitigating the Costs of Contentious Speakers Revitalizing the Clemency Process
×
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