ΩԸƽˮʹ罭ϣ
et revelabitur quasi aqua iudicium et iustitia quasi torrens fortis

 

ɷѧ֮

Ͼѧ ѧ

[ժҪ] ɵоһַ淶ķʵ֤ķǰڵѧ֤׿˶ԼֽΪԴ˽·˵Ѱľ֧֡ʵ֤ķĽ˲˹ɶɵijɱ·³ƶµĿ֮ɷѧͬ˹֮ѧɭķչϵҲ̵ʵ֤˼ἰ

[ؼ] ׿˶Լ ֽ ˹ ³ƶ ɭ

Abstract There are always two approaches to free speech theories in related researches, one is normativethe other is positive. The front should often be proved by moral philosophy, such as Meiklejohn and Dworkin. But the latter looks for proofs in existence experience. Accounting for the positive way, this comment introduces Posners costbenefit approach to the First Amendment and recommends Rubenfelds purposivism jurisprudence on the First Amendment and his arguments with Posner. Economist Sens theories system of development is also discussed in the article to elaborate on positive free speech profoundly.

Key Words free speech Meiklejohn Dworkin Posner Rubenfeld Sen

һ ɵĹ淶֤

׿˶Լɵ

ķ˹(Oliver W. Holms)Ǽǿһ Schenck v. United States дƽʱڡᵳɢЩĵһġǣΪʶһΪĻϸҲᱣھ糡شʧֻŵˡˣԴĻͱʶﵽ˻֮Σյij̶ȣڹȨԤֹЩԴʻľ޴ֻʱ۾ͿԱѹơ[1]׿˶Լ Alexander MeiklejohnԴоȷġҼ̵Σաclear and present dangerŸһе۱ԾԵȨ׿˶ԼȨһǹۣpublic speechͳйءι̵ۣϵ˽ۣprivate speechͳ޹صۡڹۣκλȨƣ˽ۣijЩ¼ơ

׿˶ԼΪ֮һֻԼBasic CompactԼĺ⣬ܷεIJΪһΪιͬȺ֮˴ͬ⣬ͳεģˡΪΪˣƽȵġԼƶɣǰƽȣ˷ӷɡԼԽȨԴڱͳߵͬ⡣[2]Ϊ¬ĹŵԼۣ׿˶Լʷϵƶ˵ɵԭȻԵij򣬶ǴӹӦձͶƱһԼƵġϣǾһۺ;йعÿ˶ɵᣬÿһ˶Ȩ˼㷢ߵķԡԭdz¹̵ĵ⣬ɲӦܵơ[3]

ֽΪʲô۱ɣ

ֽRonald Dworkinһֽ͹ܷ᳹ضַΪ½moral reading½Ĺ۵ǣе˩ӷ١ʦͨ񩤩ΪijЩĴٽǶεĺԺ͹ԵʶĹʶͺóķġ[4]ֽΪֽУֻ߷ԺĴ󷨹ǶԵԭڹͺȨǺױֳɡɡ͡ɡӪЩرɻΪɶƶΪҪĵıɷ٣ɷٸһıΧЩԼҲ֮ԱǵοΪ߷ԺԷչ참оҲΪǷϵһġ[5]ֽΪһʮ漰ijĵԭʹеκͷɵģʽ񣺼ϽΧڸЩԭͬȵĵºελڸЩԭͬȵӣظȨDzɰģɺڽЩܷдĸɡ[6]

ֽ˹Anthony LewisġƶɡMake No LawһʱָϣWilliam Brennan1964꡶ŦԼʱɳһоɷĻʯ[7]оı˴ǰͨȨһ֡ȾԼprevious restraintȨֹԸ£ijнԻΣԣڳ淢Ժͷǡɳо϶ܷһԱΪԭŽ̰ʱԺоʤߣ֤йűijЩʧʵ֤Ž籨һdzڡʵʶ⡱ֽɵĺϷݵ𣺵һǹĽǶȡΪǾбʵĵȨ˵ҪɣΪǾɻʩԼڶĹ۵мֵġΪ֮ĺͽṹϵǵij깫񿴳Ǹĵĵ塣ȣеĵǿɵ־леƶжϡ߶ԹαжϡΣֵβΪ˽˱ǽЩˣdzڶǵػһֲɿܵԸʵ岢档[8]ֽΪɳһУϵоɹ࣬ṹźȱʧˡ

ɵʵ֤

˹ɣɣΪʲô

ʲô

ڻشʲôʱʼֺͬԥζѧ˼ʹǵ˼άһϣ˹(Richard A. Posner)һģڡɡ˹Ȼ׵ʵ·һؼľѧԼļᶨ

þѧȻٶһгԼԾгϵΪԡгκεƷɵĽףǡ˼롱ķ˹˵֮Ωо˼ɽűȽ׻é༴Ҫij˼ǷΪѷǽ֮ɾгϣϿɡ[9]Ϊά˼гijֵɵľܷһ涨᲻ƶɣȥ漰ڽֹʹãۻɣ[]ƽԸԩ֮Ȩ[10]Ϊһ٣Dzòкƽķ˹ǼǿԺԸ۱һ¿ܴΣնǷѹơ˹ɽŰѻķ˹Ľ·ʽˡBʾս۵棻HΣO[offensiveness]ʾ۵ijɱ֡ɧҵȵȣpʾ۱ɱʵʵֵĸʣdpһ01֮䣩ʾδijɱڵijɱĻʣnʾ۱۷ʵֲΣܷʱ֮ͷʱ䵥λAʾִнֹ۵ĹƵijɱһӦҽ

1BpH/(1+d)n +O-A

ҽ۵ڻߴɱԳɱĸʺδԣȻȥִнijɱʱӦһۡʽ1дΪһӦֹǣҽ

2pH/1+dn+OB+A

ҽ۵Ԥڳɱ۵ִнijɱֹ֮ͩijɱ֤һֹΪijɱһ۲Ӧֹ[11]ܷһʽϾоԣabsolutelyѧ߶ֳɱ·ʾɡ

³ƶ£һ֮Ŀʲô ³ƶ(Jed Rubenfeld)˵ijϣԳɱ桢ƽ⡪ĴεɷѧΪձ飬ĿԴ˽⡣[12] Ŀһʱһȷо֮һ˼κƽ[13]ͨ³ƶٵһӵĸǿԴйܿĿĽ·

AټʻԷҪΥһġũΨһšһߵٽȫͬʱȼϵЧʡA·ĸٹ·Ϊйܣԭ65ٸΪ55Aٶʱ65˵͵ޱΪ˷ֻ棺߹·İȫԼԼȼϡAڵһۿǼǿĵڶԭı˵͵ʵϲܴٽһҪ档һサͨмҽ֤ʵ55ʵ˸ٹ·ϵ¹ʣҽȼϵЧʡٳǼǿʹЩоAıôʵϲûдٽҪ档һµ󣬷AĻģͬʱΪһԵһΥƷͼʲô⣿AûС˵ΪDZʽģûһšʹAȷʵԳټʻķʽڳϱʶȻȨŵһȨΪĹڸٹ·¹ʺȼЧʵ֤ܷ޹ء֤ÿСʱ55Ӣһ޴ķɵ֤ݶô˵A֤ҲǸٶǡһ޴ķɡ֤ݲ翵صóһǶǵۣ÷ɵͨΪĿģ߾ضָΪۡΪʲôٿԶӦԹ֮ʧΪɲAıԭӦţضһԼٶڷɱսܵóһۣ۲ĿꡣǼǿһӡǼǿķԺԵӱֱ飬ǸΪĹڵһĺ֮

һС޶ϣٱDzò۵ģضΪµ𺦱ֵҪһɱ߲֮Ϊʱȡ֮뷨ΪǷٵŪȨǺѵġڽֹԷ֮¸зijܵͷΪֻΪ1ɲʵһΪֹķǷأ2ĿΪĿģýģ3ɽѡԣؿۣ߱Ļ˽ûȨɣĻΪôؾбԡ[14]

ΪʲôĿȡɱɷ³ƶ¸ɣ1Գɱģʽɽзѱ򵥵ŪˣĿȽϼȷ2һĺƽ⣬ûͳһĶ⣬֮޷ȽϵġʲôǵһȨĹͬԪأ3ɱ˼·ṩһվסŵϸʽıθ˵ɣ4ɵĺƽԴĻÿһӷöΪһصĵһ⣻5ɽƽĹ۵ӦñܾһԭһĻʵϡ[15]

˹ɶ³ƶµ˻ĻӦ˹˵ǿҵشŭǽòżģΪŽ˾ijˣڲеʱҪǵоϵͳ[16]֮ٽĺƽġΪ˶ijɱ⣬˹˼1ɱ롰桱һܱһأڵһĿ£ҪΪֽ2Ժɼ֮ʱпã3ʱζһڵijɱΪȷ4ɱ治ÿһﶼҪºһ飬һ͵İ֮ɱǺȷķٺӦõһ5ijɱĺƽDZԵģڹ̶ĺ֮⡣[17]˹Ϊ³ƶ·һ󣬼ͨѼ򵥲þֽΪɻԪشӶʹǿˡˣһʵڿ԰ȥԡһϵЬĺܸӵġңĿ֮ؽڳټʻкܱܿȳɱ֮ȽϸΪѡ[18]ǣڲ˹ɵɻӦ³ƶDzͬġ³ͬЩ˹֮۵У1ҡоĹ۵ΣյʱԽֹЩ۵㣻2ijϣͨνġʵһڣ3һûȥ߷Ժܷԭ[19]

ɭɿչ

ϸӲ˹³ƶµǻ֣ᷢλѧʵվڲͬƽ̨ϻԻġ˹ͼ˵ǣǵȨһȨܵܶʵصӰ졣ڲаʱоϵͳ൱ĿȨ֮ƽ⡣˹ɻشԸΪȨΪʲô³ƶµĹ۵ǣһȨǾԵģֻΪֱĿƲõۣܵһۣ̰ɿȣܵơ³ƶ²͵ԹɳɣȨӦģɴˣΪߵķֻǽ·IJͬѡңʵ֤Ľ·ʹǸõʶɡ˴˶ߵ⣬ӡᾭѧҰǡɭ(Amartya Sen)ġѧġҲͬ൱ļֵ

ɺϢءɭΪûѡ٣ûзԵûвĹĻռ䣬Ȩ߾ͲΪֹʧܶеκһ棬ȴѼĵijͷôݸͳμź쵼ˣ͸εļȥͼֹκвԵļġʵԴЩܹԷֹĵشӰϢ磬ɺ͹ڸɺͺˮںϢʧҵʺӰϢشĹסڽȡĵý壬ǹңԶвĻҪԴرǵܵƶȵļȥ¶ʵھȨͨͨɾЩʵԣɭǿܼвĹӵеõԤϵͳ[20]ǻͨ׵˵ǾǣɵĵطͲмġɭĹڣ÷չҪĿɵչɱԾ÷չҲҪĹԼֵ뼢ĵĹϵܺõ˵һ㡣

ɭԡҫ⡱Ҫǣɷ÷չɭΪһС¼µȣ֧һĽۡרƶͣ͵Ĺ飬ٶȷչٶλˮƽĹ粩ɡܶоɡͬžùгʶʺ͸߾ҵʡɹظĸһǴٽչġ[21]ΪƶϢҪֶΣʣɭΪʵġ

ֱʵ֮

ǰᵽǵ˼άͬζѧооǿҵʵػij̶ֳϣͬӦááǣ̬ᵼһ֡ۡơǻó۵ƫԼܵ˵ΪһҪеĹջĽͣһҪͬ籣侲ľ롣Ƕ۵ʵչʾһ֡˼˼ڡ˼ѧóһ˼չʾֱʵ磬ɡʶγԼɵġʵ״淶֤֮ṹĽǶȲɵıҪԼϷݣʵ֤ɵʵ̬Ҳֱֻʵ֮ɣDzܻɵ

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1] []˹ɣ۵ǰأ룬йѧ2003棬67ҳ

[2] []׿˶Լɵķ޶ȣ룬2003棬82ҳ

[3] ͬϣ83ҳ

[4] []ֽɵķ룬Ϻ2001棬2ҳ

[5] ͬϣ3ҳ

[6] ͬϣ9ҳ

[7] ͬϡ277ҳ

[8] ͬϣ282ҳ283ҳ

[9] []׿˶Լɵķ޶ȣ룬2003棬59ҳ

[10] ǧϵϲᣩйѧ2000棬707ҳ

[11] ͬϣ70ҳ71ҳ

[12] Jed Rubenfeld, The First Amendments Purpose, in Stanford Law Reviewvol.53(2001), p.768

[13] Id. at 770

[14] Id. at 784

[15] Id. at 787793

[16] Richard A. Posner, Pragmatism Versus Purposivism in Fist Amendment Analysis, in Stanford Law Reviewvol.54(2002), p.739

[17] Id. at p.740

[18] Id. at p.742

[19] Jed Rubenfeld, A Reply To Posner, in Stanford Law Reviewvol.54(2002), p.754

[20] ǡɭɿչ룬йѧ2002棬177ҳ

[21] ͬϣ151ҳ152ҳ