請用此 Handle URI 來引用此文件:
http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/92582
完整後設資料紀錄
DC 欄位 | 值 | 語言 |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.advisor | 林明昕 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.advisor | Ming-Hsin Lin | en |
dc.contributor.author | 郭家銘 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.author | Chia-Ming Kuo | en |
dc.date.accessioned | 2024-04-24T16:14:56Z | - |
dc.date.available | 2024-04-25 | - |
dc.date.copyright | 2024-04-24 | - |
dc.date.issued | 2024 | - |
dc.date.submitted | 2024-04-08 | - |
dc.identifier.citation | 中文文獻
(一)專書 楊崇森(2015),《遨遊美國法 III: 美國法制的實務與運作》,華藝。 Roy Strong(著),陳建元(譯)(2021),《大不列顛兩千年》,聯經。 (二)期刊論文 林超駿(2010),〈行政權之釋憲機制:美國聯邦訴訟(次)長(Solicitor General)制度與運作簡介〉,《月旦法學雜誌》,第180期,頁180-206。 英文文獻 (一) 專書 Baker, J. (2019). Introduction to English Legal History. OUP Oxford. Black, R. C., & Owens, R. J. (2012). The solicitor general and the United States Supreme Court: Executive branch influence and judicial decisions. Cambridge University Press. Breger, M. J., & Edles, G. J. (2015). Independent agencies in the United States: Law, structure, and politics. Oxford University Press, USA. Caplan, L. (1987). The Tenth Justice: The Solicitor General and The Rule of Law (1987). Knopf. Clayton, C. W. (2015). The politics of justice: Attorney General and the making of government legal policy. Routledge. Cummings, H., & McFarland (1937). Federal Justice: Chapters in the History of Justice and the Federal Executive. New York, Macmillan. Edwards, J. L. J. (1964). The Law Officers of the Crown: A Study of the Offices of Attorney-General and Solicitor-General of England, with an Account of the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions of England, Sweet & Maxwell. Hughes, A. (1998). The Causes of the English Civil War, Bloomsbury Publishing. Jefferson, T. (1895), The Writings of Thomas Jefferson: 1788-1792. Vol. 5. 138. Available at: https://books.google.com.tw/books?hl=zh-TW&lr=&id=w2YSAAAAYAAJ&oi=fnd&pg=PR23&dq=Ford,+Jefferson%27s+Writings+(1895)&ots=T_9R06ry-F&sig=K23wPKus6mOMBE1FgWTJXnpvD2U&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q=Ford%2C%20Jefferson''s%20Writings%20(1895)&f=false Pacelle, R. L. (2003). Between law and politics: The solicitor general and the structuring of race, gender, and reproductive rights litigation (No. 14). Texas A&M University Press. Perry, H. W. (1991). Deciding to decide: agenda setting in the United States Supreme Court. Harvard University Press. Seymour, W. N. Jr. (1975). United States Attorney, New York: William Morrow and Company, Inc. Sisk, G. C. (2006). Litigation with the Federal Government. ALI-ABA. Tomlins, C. L. (Ed.). (2005). The United States Supreme Court: The Pursuit of Justice. Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. (二) 書之篇章 Cuddihy, William J., ''The Wilkes Cases: Search and Seizure in Great Britain, 1761–1776'', The Fourth Amendment: Origins and Original Meaning, 602 - 1791. Fortin, M. F. (2021). The king’s two bodies and the Crown a corporation sole: historical dualities in English legal thinking. History of European Ideas, 1-19. Martin, L. (1999). The State, the Crown and the Law. The Nature of the Crown: A Legal and Political Analysis, 33-76. Wade, W. (1999). The Crown, ministers and officials: legal status and liability. The Nature of the Crown: A Legal and Political Analysis, 23-32. (三) 期刊論文 Baker, N. V. (2020). History, Norms and Conflicting Loyalties in the Office of Attorney General. Mercer Law Review, 72, 833. Bloch, S. L. (1989). The Early Role of the Attorney General in Our Constitutional Scheme: In the Beginning There Was Pragmatism. Duke Law Journal, 561. Borrelli, M., Hult, K., & Kassop, N. (2001). The White House Counsel''s Office. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 31(4), 561-584. Brand, P. A. (1987). The Origins of the English Legal Profession. Law and History Review, 5(1), 31-50. Calabresi, S. G. (1998). The President, the Supreme Court, and the Constitution: A Brief Positive Account of the Role of Government Lawyers in the Development of Constitutional Law. Law and Contemp. Probs., 61, 61. Casto, W. R. (2012). Advising Presidents: Robert Jackson and the Destroyers-For-Bases Deal. American Journal of Legal History, 52(1), 1-135. Cooley, R. W. (1958). Predecessors of the federal attorney general: The attorney general in England and the American colonies. American Journal of Legal History, 2(4), 304-312. Cordray, M. M., & Cordray, R. (2010). The Solicitor General''s Changing Role in Supreme Court Litigation. Boston College Law Review, 51, 1323-1382. Dichio, M., Strother, L., & Williams, R. (2022). “To Render Prompt Justice”: The Origins and Construction of the U.S. Court of Claims. Studies in American Political Development, 36(2), 120-137. Herz, M. (1990). United States v. United States: When Can the Federal Government Sue Itself. William & Mary Law Review, 32, 893-991. Hoff, S. B. (2019). One-third of the legislative authority: the veto record of President Herbert Hoover. Art & Humanity Open Access Journal, 3(2), 98-104. Holdsworth, W. S. (1918). Early History of the Attorney and Solicitor General. Illinois Law Review, 13, 602-619. Jones, E. (1969). The office of attorney-general. Cambridge Law Journal, 27(1), 43-53. Key, S. (1938). The Legal Work of the Federal Government. Virginia Law Review, 25(2), 165–201. Kramer, R., & Siegel, N. (1960). The Attorney General of England and the Attorney General of the United States. Duke Law Journal, 524-534. Krislov, S. (1963). The amicus curiae brief: from friendship to advocacy. Yale Law Journal, 72(4), 694-722. Lannan, R. E. (1983). Immigration and Naturalization Service v. Chadha: The Legislative Veto Declared Unconstitutional. West Virginia Law Review, 86, 461. Lochner, T. (1993). The relationship between the Office of Solicitor General and the independent agencies: A reevaluation. Virginia Law Review, 79(2), 549-582. Mathis, D. (1967). Chisholm v. Georgia: Background and Settlement. The Journal of American History, 54(1), 19-29. Mayer, D. N. (2008). Substantive due process rediscovered: the rise and fall of liberty of contract. Mercer Law Review, 60(2), 563-658. McGinnis, J. O. (1993). Models of the opinion function of the attorney general: normative, descriptive, and historical prolegomenon. Cardozo Law Review, 15(Issues 1-2), 375-436. Meese, E. (1983). The Institutional Presidency: A View from the White House. Presidential Studies Quarterly, 13(2), 191-197. Michigan Law Review (1976), Confession of Error by the Solicitor General, Michigan Law Review, 74, 1067-1083. Nealon, R. W. (1950). The Opinion Function of the Federal Attorney General. New York University Law Review, 25, 825. Shimomura, F. D. (1985). The history of claims against the United States: the evolution from legislative toward judicial model of payment. Louisiana Law Review, 45(3), 625-700. Siederer, N. D. (1974). The Campbell Case. Journal of Contemporary History, 9(2), 143–162. Stern, R. L. (1960). The Solicitor General''s Office and Administrative Agency Litigation. American Bar Association Journal, 46, 154. Strauss, D. A. (1998). The Solicitor General and the Interests of the United States. Law and Contemporary Problems, 61(1), 165-177. Turner, R. V. (1977). The Origins of Common Pleas and King''s Bench. American Journal of Legal History, 21, 238-254. Wiener, F. B. (1973). Tracing the Origins of the Court of King''s Bench. American Bar Association Journal, 59, 753-758. Yale Law Journal (1969). Government Litigation in the Supreme Court: The Roles of the Solicitor General. Yale Law Journal, 78, 1442-1481. (四) 網路資料 高點法律網,刑事法院(Crown Court),http://lawyer.get.com.tw/dic/DictionaryDetail.aspx?iDT=45349 (最後瀏覽日:2023/4/2) 漢典,https://www.zdic.net/hant/%E6%AA%A2%E5%AF%9F (最後瀏覽日:2023/4/17) 49 Cong. Rec. 4291-4296. Available at: https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GPO-CRECB-1913-pt5-v49 Act of May 15, 1820, ch. 107, 3 Stat. 592, § 1. Available at: https://www.census.gov/history/pdf/act-amend-1820.pdf Article of Confederation (1777), Art. 12. Available at: https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=001/llsl001.db&recNum=131 Article of Confederation (1777), Art. 13. Available at: https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=001/llsl001.db&recNum=131 Article of Confederation (1777), Art. 9. Available at:https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=001/llsl001.db&recNum=129 Articles of Confederation (1777), Art. 2. Available at: https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=001/llsl001.db&recNum=128 Britannica, Federalist-Party, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Federalist-Party(最後瀏覽日:2023/3/29) Britannica, Republican-Party, https://www.britannica.com/topic/Republican-Party(最後瀏覽日:2023/3/29) Chestnut, A. (2015). Call for the Views of the Solicitor General in Original Jurisdiction Proceedings: Solicitor General as Advisor or Advocate? Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=2670903 Clement, P. D. Confirmation Hearing on the Nomination of Paul D. Clement to be Solicitor General of the United States, Hearing Before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate (109th Congress, First Session). Available at: http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/senate/pdf/109hrg/21706.pdf. Congress, Art.II.S2.C2.3.11.1 Overview of Principal and Inferior Officers, https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S2-C2-3-11-1/ALDE_00013101/ Cornell Law School, Court of International Trade, https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/court_of_international_trade (最後瀏覽日:2023/4/10) Encyclopedia, Serjeant At Law, https://www.encyclopedia.com/history/modern-europe/british-and-irish-history/serjeant-law (最後瀏覽日:2023/4/3) Federal Election Commission, FEC v. NRA Political Victory Fund, https://www.fec.gov/legal-resources/court-cases/fec-v-nra-political-victory-fund/ (最後瀏覽日:2023/4/2) Federal v. Consolidated Government, https://press-pubs.uchicago.edu/founders/documents/v1ch8s39.html (最後瀏覽日:2023/4/11) Harvard Law School, Bernard Koteen Office of Public Interest Advising, The Fast Track to a U.S. Attorney''s Office , https://hls.harvard.edu/bernard-koteen-office-of-public-interest-advising/opia-job-search-toolkit/career-and-application-guides/the-fast-track-to-a-u-s-attorneys-office/#conclusion .(最後瀏覽日:2023/4/11) History.com Editor, Veto, https://www.history.com/topics/us-government/veto (最後瀏覽日:2023/4/2) Jefferson, T. (1820), Letter to William C. Jarvis. Available at: https://classroom.monticello.org/view/72745/ (最後瀏覽日:2023/3/29) Monticello, Patent, https://www.monticello.org/research-education/thomas-jefferson-encyclopedia/patents/ (最後瀏覽日:2023/3/29) National Archives, Lend-Lease Act (1941), https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/lend-lease-act (最後瀏覽日:2023/4/8) National Archives, Records of the Claims Committees, https://www.archives.gov/legislative/guide/house/chapter-06.html (最後瀏覽日:2023年4月1日) National Archives, Treaty of Paris, https://www.archives.gov/milestone-documents/treaty-of-paris (最後瀏覽日:2023/3/22) National Constitution Center, How FDR lost his brief war on the Supreme Court (February 5, 2023), https://constitutioncenter.org/blog/how-fdr-lost-his-brief-war-on-the-supreme-court-2 (最後瀏覽日:2023/4/8) National Park Service, The Supreme Court Decides in Chisholm v. Georgia, https://www.nps.gov/articles/000/chisholm-v-georgia.htm (最後瀏覽日:2023/4/2) Senate Legal Counsel, 1243. Available at: https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GPO-RIDDICK-1992/pdf/GPO-RIDDICK-1992-127.pdf Tenure of Office Act, § 1, 14 Stat. 430 (1867). Available at : https://www.senate.gov/about/resources/pdf/johnson-tenure-of-office-act.pdf (最後瀏覽日:2023/3/29) The American Presidency Project, https://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/advanced-search?field-keywords=signing%20statement&items_per_page=25&page=1 (最後瀏覽日2023/4/2) The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, George Montagu Dunk, 2nd Earl of Halifax (1716-1771), https://www.ouramericanrevolution.org/index.cfm/people/view/pp0039 (最後瀏覽日:2023/4/2) The Federalist, No. 78. Available at: https://avalon.law.yale.edu/18th_century/fed78.asp The Judiciary Act of 1789, § 35, 1 Stat. 73, 92-93 (1789). Available at: https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=001/llsl001.db&recNum=215 The Judiciary Act of 1789, § 1, 1 Stat. 73 (1789). Available at: https://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/ampage?collId=llsl&fileName=001/llsl001.db&recNum=196 United Kingdom: Constitutional Reform Act 2005 [United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland], 2005 Chapter 4, 24 March 2005. Available at: https://www.refworld.org/docid/48abd5650.html (最後瀏覽日:2023/3/22) United States Department of Justice, https://www.justice.gov/ (最後瀏覽日2023/4/10) United States Department of Justice, Office of Legal Counsel, Authority of the Department of Justice to Represent Members of Congress in a Civil Suit (July 10, 2019). Available at https://www.justice.gov/olc/file/1171396/download. United States Department of Justice, Office of Legal Counsel, The Legal Significance of Presidential Signing Statements (2006), https://web.archive.org/web/20010219034253/http://www.usdoj.gov/olc/signing.htm#N_7_(最後瀏覽日:2023/4/2) United States Department of Justice, Office of Legal Counsel, The Attorney General’s Duty to Defend & Enforce Constitutionally Objectionable Legislation, 4A Op. O.L.C. 55, 55 (1980). Available at: https://www.justice.gov/file/22296/download United States Department of Justice, Office of Legal Counsel, The Attorney General’s Duty to Defend the Constitutionality of Statutes, 5 Op. O.L.C. 25 (1981). Available at: https://www.justice.gov/d9/olc/opinions/1981/04/31/op-olc-v005-p0025_0.pdf United States Department of Justice, Office of Legal Counsel, Use of the “Pocket Veto” During Intersession Adjournments of Congress, 11 Op. O.L.C. 327 (1987). Available at: https://www.justice.gov/file/23566/download United States Department of Justice, Office of Legislative Affairs, About the Office, https://www.justice.gov/ola (最後瀏覽日:2023/4/11) United States Department of Justice, Office of Public Affairs, Letter from the Attorney General to Congress on Litigation Involving the Defense of Marriage Act. Available at: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/letter-attorney-general-congress-litigation-involving-defense-marriage-act United States Department of Justice, Office of Solicitor General, Supreme Court Briefs, https://www.justice.gov/osg/supreme-court-briefs?text=&sc_term=2021&type=petition_for_writ_of_certiorari&subject=All (最後瀏覽日:2023/4/11) United States House of Representative, President Vetoes, https://history.house.gov/Institution/Presidential-Vetoes/Presidential-Vetoes/ (最後瀏覽日:2023/4/2) United States Senate, The Virginia Plan, https://www.senate.gov/civics/common/generic/Virginia_Plan_item.htm (最後瀏覽日:2023/4/11) Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page (最後瀏覽日:2023/4/23) Winson, G. I. (2004). Researching the Laws of the Colony of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations. Available at:https://docs.rwu.edu/law_fac_fs/83/ | - |
dc.identifier.uri | http://tdr.lib.ntu.edu.tw/jspui/handle/123456789/92582 | - |
dc.description.abstract | 本文以美國聯邦政府的首席法律顧問和出庭律師——聯邦法務總長(Attorney General for the United States)為研究對象,對該職位的起源、法律規定、在權力部門中的定位、任免方式、工作性質、主要職能,以及後來機構化成為美國聯邦司法部的歷史背景和現行運作狀況做了詳盡的介紹。
本文首先探究了作為制度原型的英格蘭及威爾斯法務總長,考證這個職位的形成歷史,並介紹了它的副手以及它的服務對象。同時,也說明了這個制度是如何在英屬北美洲殖民地落地申根,成為日後美國設立聯邦法務總長的基礎。 隨後,本文從設立聯邦法務總長的《1789年司法機構法》出發,探討聯邦法務總長職位的各種性質,並將重點放在聯邦法務總長的兩項主要職能——為政府提供法律意見,以及為政府進行訴訟。在此過程當中,本文不僅會說明英國制度對美國制度所產生的影響,也會強調美國聯邦法務總長對總統履行其「確保法律被忠實地執行」之憲法義務而言是多麼重要。此外,本文也將對美國聯邦最高法院自行創設的違憲審查權進行批判,並主張行政部門應擁有不遜於司法機構的憲法解釋權。 再來,本文將介紹聯邦政府法律事務的整合史,也就是作為聯邦法務總長肢體的聯邦司法部的設立過程。其後,本文將介紹現在負責協助聯邦法務總長履行其主要職能的各個單位,包括聯邦司法部法制顧問處、聯邦地區法務長、聯邦司法部訴訟廳以及最重要的聯邦訟務總長和其辦公室。 最後,本文將以美國聯邦法務總長制度為鏡,檢視我國現行司法行政制度,並提供改革建議。 | zh_TW |
dc.description.abstract | This article provides a comprehensive overview of the Attorney General for the United States, who serves as the chief legal advisor and litigator for the federal government. It examines the origins, legal framework, institutional positioning, appointment process, job nature, primary functions of the Attorney General, and the history and function of the institutional Attorney General——the Department of Justice of the United States.
Regarding the origins of the Attorney General for the United States, this article traces the development of the position’s predecessor——English Attorney General, and explains how this system was transplanted to the North American Colonies and provided the model for the Attorney General for the United States. Regarding the position of the Attorney General for the United States, this article starting from the constitutional background of the United States, explains why the United States Congress did not provide detailed instructions on the appointment and the removal of the position in the Judiciary Act of 1789, which created the position and only gave him limited power and meager salary. After introducing the position, appointment process, and job nature of the Attorney General, the article focuses on the two primary functions of the position, which are providing legal advice to and conducting litigation for the government. In addition, this article criticizes the Supreme Court of the United States for creating its own power of judicial review and advocates that the Executive branch should have the authority to interpret the Constitution, not inferior to the Judicial branch. Furthermore, this article will introduce the history of the integration of federal legal affairs, namely the establishment process of the Department of Justice, which serves as the body of the Attorney General. Subsequently, this article will introduce various units responsible for assisting the Attorney General in performing their main functions, including the Office of Legal Counsel, United States Attorneys, Divisions of the Department of Justice, and most importantly, the Solicitor General of the United States and his office. Finally, this article will examine our country's current judicial administrative system by using the U.S. federal Attorney General system as a mirror and provide reform suggestions. | en |
dc.description.provenance | Submitted by admin ntu (admin@lib.ntu.edu.tw) on 2024-04-24T16:14:56Z No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
dc.description.provenance | Made available in DSpace on 2024-04-24T16:14:56Z (GMT). No. of bitstreams: 0 | en |
dc.description.tableofcontents | 第一章、緒論 1
第一節、研究動機 1 第二節、研究範圍、方法與限制 2 第三節、論文架構 4 第二章、法務總長制度的雛形 7 第一節、英格蘭法務總長 7 第二節、英屬北美洲殖民地時期 68 第三節、本章小結 78 第三章、聯邦法務總長的誕生與發展 79 第一節、政府和法律的整合:從邦聯到聯邦 79 第二節、美國聯邦法務總長的設立 93 第三節、《1789年聯邦司法機構法案》所生的疑慮與後續發展 96 第四節、本章小結 128 第四章、聯邦法務總長的主要職能 130 第一節、向政府提供官方法律意見 130 第二節、代表政府進行訴訟 234 第三節、本章小結 277 第五章、聯邦法務總長的組織化:聯邦司法部 279 第一節、聯邦司法部的設立歷史 279 第二節、聯邦司法部的現況 296 第三節、本章小結 352 第六章、結語與反思:聯邦法務總長制度帶給臺灣的啟示 354 第一節、臺灣法制現況 354 第二節、本文建議 360 參考文獻 366 | - |
dc.language.iso | zh_TW | - |
dc.title | 以美國之名:聯邦法務總長之研究 | zh_TW |
dc.title | In the Name of the United States: A Study of the Attorney General for the United States | en |
dc.type | Thesis | - |
dc.date.schoolyear | 112-2 | - |
dc.description.degree | 碩士 | - |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | 黃丞儀;宮文祥 | zh_TW |
dc.contributor.oralexamcommittee | Cheng-Yi Huang;Wen-Hsiang Kung | en |
dc.subject.keyword | 法務總長,檢察總長,訟務總長,副檢察長,聯邦地區法務長,聯邦檢察官,美國聯邦司法部,美國執法機構,美國司法機構法案,美國司法制度,美國權力分立,憲法解釋權,憲法爭議落幕理論, | zh_TW |
dc.subject.keyword | Attorney General,Solicitor General,United States Attorney,Department of Justice,Law Officer,Judiciary Act,Judicial System,Checks and Balance,Executive Power of Constitutional Interpretation,Doctrine of Constitutional Closure, | en |
dc.relation.page | 377 | - |
dc.identifier.doi | 10.6342/NTU202400838 | - |
dc.rights.note | 同意授權(限校園內公開) | - |
dc.date.accepted | 2024-04-09 | - |
dc.contributor.author-college | 法律學院 | - |
dc.contributor.author-dept | 法律學系 | - |
顯示於系所單位: | 法律學系 |
文件中的檔案:
檔案 | 大小 | 格式 | |
---|---|---|---|
ntu-112-2.pdf 授權僅限NTU校內IP使用(校園外請利用VPN校外連線服務) | 3.04 MB | Adobe PDF | 檢視/開啟 |
系統中的文件,除了特別指名其著作權條款之外,均受到著作權保護,並且保留所有的權利。