課程大綱

課程資訊

課程名稱	美國憲法案例專題四 CASE STUDY ON AMERICAN CONSTITUTIONAL LAW(Ⅳ)
開課學期	97-2
授課對象	法律學院法律學系
授課教師	張文貞
課號	LAW5275
課程識別碼	A21 U2890
班次
學分	2
全/半年	半年
必/選修	選修
上課時間	星期二3,4(10:20~12:10)
上課地點
備註	教室為社法研3。與研究所合開。限學士班三年級以上總人數上限：24人
Ceiba 課程網頁	http://ceiba.ntu.edu.tw/972american_case_4
課程簡介影片
核心能力關聯	核心能力與課程規劃關聯圖
課程大綱
為確保您我的權利,請尊重智慧財產權及不得非法影印
課程概述	本學期美國憲法案例專題的主題在於跨國憲法對話(transnational constitutional dialogue)，探討法院對於比較法、外國法院判決、國際法或國際法院判決之參考及引用，對法院判決所生之影響，以及此種參考或引用的合理性與正當性。在此主題之上，本課程選擇美國聯邦最高法院的指標性判決中，法院在其判決中直接或間接引用或參考外國法、國際人權法或外國法院判例，以深入探討此種跨國憲法引用或對話對美國聯邦最高法院判決過程之影響，並進一步討論其相關之理論爭議。 College of Law, National Taiwan University Seminar on American Constitutional Case Law Class Number: A21 U2300及U2890 Class Schedule: Tuesday 10:20am – 12:10pm Instructor: Professor Wen-Chen Chang Tel: 2351-9641 ext. 509 Email: wenchenchang@ntu.edu.tw Teaching Assistant: Lo, Yi-Chen Email: r96a21012@ntu.edu.tw Spring, 2008 I. Course Introduction This semester will focus on the rising transnational issues in American constitutionalism. Along with the trend of globalization and the development of transnational legal dialogue, the nexus between constitution and international law has become much stronger. There are also growing numbers of transnational legal issues in the domestic constitutional cases. Various forms of frequent transnational interactions have raised the importance of certain issues, such as the status of and human rights protections for foreigners, and their relationship with nationals. Under the menace of terrorist attack, measure of anti-terrorism turns into excuses for human rights violations on foreigners, especially on certain races. How courts can strike the balance between national security and human rights (especially human rights of foreigners)? More interestingly, due to the recent development of Alien Torts Claims Act jurisprudence, many transnational human rights litigations have diverted their battle field to the U.S. Federal Courts. Thus American law has its platform for the dialogue with international law. The transnationality of constitution and its nexus to the international law gain more and more significance.
課程目標	由於這些判決橫跨早期以及晚近的判決，在議題上也涵蓋垂直（聯邦原則）及水平之權力分立、重要的基本權利如不受殘酷不尋常處罰之權利、平等權、隱私權、正當法律程序、外國人的權利等重要議題，亦足夠提供對美國憲法基礎案例一個完整的鳥瞰。當然，在某些議題的跨國憲法對話會多過其他議題（這也是本課程希望去回答的其中一個問題所在），因此本課程也不免對特定議題有所偏重。
課程要求	這門課的授課語言會視同學的能力、需求以及課程性質而定，某些中英夾雜不可避免。修課同學可以選擇以中文或英文來進行課程報告以及相關之寫作。 II Class Schedule required readings #suggested readings but required for graduates Week One: 2/19 Course Introduction Week Two: 2/26 1. Early Decisions Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. (1 Cranch) 137 (1803). Week Three: 3/4 Cummings v. Missouri, 71 U.S. (4 Wall.) 277 (1867). The Paquete Habana, 175 U.S. 677 (1900). Lochner v. New York, 198 U.S. 45 (1905). Week Four: 3/11 Muller v. Oregon, 208 U.S. 412 (1905). Missouri v. Holland, 252 U.S. 416 (1920). Vicki C. Jackson, Constitutional Comparisons: Convergence, Resistance, Engagement, 119 HARV. L. REV. 109 (2005) *Vicki C Jackson, Transnational Challenges to Constitutional Law: Convergence, Resistance and Engagement, 35 FEDERAL L. REV. 161 (2007) Week Five: 3/18 2. Eighth Amendment & Death Penalty Trop v. Dulles, 356 U.S. 86 (1958). Oklahoma v. Thompson, 487 U.S. 815 (1988). Week Six: 3/25 No Class this week Week Seven: 4/1 Stanford v. Kentucky, 492 U.S. 361 (1989). #Ernest A. Young, The Trouble with Global Constitutionalism, 38 TEX. INT'L L.J. 527 (2003) Week Eight: 4/8 Knight v. Florida, 528 U.S. 990 (1999). Foster v. Florida, 537 U.S. 990 (2002) Week Nine: 4/15 Atkins v. Virginia, 536 U.S. 304 (2002). Roper v. Simmons, 543 U.S. 551 (2005). Week Ten: 4/22 3. Separation of powers Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer, 343 U.S. 579 (1952). Hamdan v. Rumsfeld, 126 S.Ct. 2749 (2006). #Vicki C. Jackson, Constitutional Law and Transnational Comparisons: The Youngstown Decision and American Exceptionalism, 30 HARV. J.L. & PUB. POL'Y 191 (2006). Week Eleven: 4/29 4. Federalism Printz v. United States, 521 U.S. 898 (1997). Crosby v. National Foreign Trade Council, 530 U.S. 363 (2000). #Mark Tushnet, Federalism and International Human Rights in the New Constitutional Order, 47 WAYNE L. REV. 841 (2001). By 4pm: Submission of term paper topic and outline Week Twelve: 5/6 5. Rights 5.1. Equal protection Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306 (2003). 5.2. Due process Reid v. Covert, 354 U.S. 1 (1957). Week Thirteen: 5/13 Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 (1966). Week Fourteen: 5/20 5.3. Privacy Roe v. Wade, 410 U.S. 113 (1973). Planned Parenthood of S.E. Pa. v. Casey, 505 U.S. 833 (1992). Week Fifteen: 5/27 Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702 (1997). Lawrence v. Texas, 539 U.S. 558 (2003). Week Sixteen: 6/3 5.4. Alien people’s rights Oyama v. California, 332 U.S. 633 (1948). Alien Children Education Litigation, 501 F. Supp. 544 (1980). Week Seventeen: 6/10 The presentation of student’s term-paper outline Week Eighteen: 6/17 The deadline for final term paper
預期每週課後學習時數
Office Hours
指定閱讀
參考書目	案例及補充資料皆請參考教師提供之講義 *required readings #suggested readings but required for graduates
評量方式 (僅供參考)

課程進度

週次	日期	單元主題
無資料