掃一掃
關注中圖網
官方微博
本類五星書更多>
-
>
闖進數學世界――探秘歷史名題
-
>
中醫基礎理論
-
>
當代中國政府與政治(新編21世紀公共管理系列教材)
-
>
高校軍事課教程
-
>
思想道德與法治(2021年版)
-
>
毛澤東思想和中國特色社會主義理論體系概論(2021年版)
-
>
中醫內科學·全國中醫藥行業高等教育“十四五”規劃教材
法律英語泛讀教程(上) 版權信息
- ISBN：9787301274989
- 條形碼：9787301274989 ; 978-7-301-27498-9
- 裝幀：一般膠版紙
- 冊數：暫無
- 重量：暫無
- 所屬分類：>>
法律英語泛讀教程(上) 本書特色
美國法在世界范圍內影響深遠，學習研究美國法意義重大，這不僅表現為許多國家都在研究美國的法律規則，借鑒其成熟做法，還表現為許多國際公約也參照美國法的理念、原則、規則制定。因此，本書作為法律英語專業的泛讀教材，主要選取了美國歷史上*有影響的36個案例，按時間順序編排，分上下兩冊，希望讀者通過研讀這些經典案例，了解法官判案推理過程和有關法律、法規的適用，更有利于學習標準的法律英語，也更容易掌握美國法的精髓。本書選取了十幾個經典案例，以期*大程度的展現美國法原貌。
法律英語泛讀教程(上) 內容簡介
隨著我國入世和世界經濟一體化進程的不斷加快，靠前交流合作日益增多，涉外法務活動少見頻繁，法律英語的重要性日益凸顯。掌握專業英語已經成為現代法律人推薦的職業素質。由于法律英語的特殊性。國內一直沒有一個科學的考核指標衡量法律從業人員專業英語的掌握程度。法律英語證書（LEC）全國統一考試的推出為我國法律英語的教與學指明了方向。意義重大、影響深遠。
法律英語泛讀教程(上) 目錄
001
002
[1]
目 錄
CONTENTS
法 律 英 語 泛 讀 教 程 （上）
目錄
Unit 1 WILLIAM MARBURY v. JAMES MADISON, SECRETARY OF
STATE OF THE UNITED STATES
Unit 2 McCULLOCH v. STATE OF MARYLAND et al
Unit 3 PLESSY v. FERGUSON
Unit 4 LOCHNER v. NEW YORK
Unit 5 A.L.A. SCHECHTER POULTRY CORP. ET AL. v. UNITED STATES
Unit 6 KOREMATSU v. UNITED STATES
Unit 7 SHELLEY ET UX. v. KRAEMER ET UX
Unit 8 BROWN ET AL.v.BOARD OF EDUCATION OF TOPEKA ET AL
Unit 9 ENGEL ET AL. v. VITALE ET AL
Unit 10 GIDEON v. WAINWRIGHT, CORRECTIONS DIRECTOR
Unit 11 HEART OF ATLANTA MOTEL, INC.v.UNITED STATES ET AL
Unit 12 NEW YORK TIMES CO. v. SULLIVAN
Unit 13 GRISWOLD ET AL. v. CONNECTICUT
Unit 14 FRONTIERO ET VIR v. RICHARDSON, SECRETARY OF
DEFENSE, ET AL
Unit 15 LOVING ET UX. v. VIRGINIA
Unit 16 GRIGGS ET AL. v. DUKE POWER CO
Appendix Ⅰ ANNOTATIONS TO CASES
Appendix Ⅱ HOW TO BRIEF A CASE
Appendix Ⅲ HOW TO READ A LEGAL OPINION
Appendix Ⅳ HOW TO READ A LEGAL CITATION
展開全部
法律英語泛讀教程(上) 節選
It cannot be presumed that any clause in the constitution is intended to be without effect；and，therefore，such a construction is inadmissible，unless the words require it. If the solicitude of the convention，respecting our peace with foreign powers9 induced a provision that the supreme court should take original jurisdiction in cases which might be supposed to affect them；yet the clause would have proceeded no further than to provide for such cases，if no further restriction on the powers of congress had been intended.That they should have appellate jurisdiction in all other cases，with such exceptions as congress might make，is no restriction；unless the words be deemed exclusive of original jurisdiction. When an instrument organizing fundamentally a judicial system，divides it into one supreme，and so many inferior courts as the legislature may ordain and establish；then enumerates its powers，and proceeds so far to distribute them，as to define the jurisdiction of the supreme court by declaring the cases in which it shall take original jurisdiction，and that in others it shall take appellate jurisdiction；the plain import of the words seems to be，that in one class of cases its jurisdiction is original，and not appellate；in the other it is appellate，and not original.If any other construction would render the clause inoperative，that is an additional reason for rejecting such other construction，and for adhering to their obvious meaning. To enable this court，then，to issue a mandamus，it must be shown to be an exercise of appellate jurisdiction，or to be necessary to enable them to exercise appellate jurisdiction. It has been stated at the bar that the appellate jurisdiction may beexercised in a variety of forms，and that if it be the will of the legislature that a mandamus should be used for that purpose，that will must be obeyed.This is true，yet the jurisdiction must be appellate，not original. It is the essential criterion of appellate jurisdiction，that it revises and corrects the proceedings in a cause already instituted，and does not create that cause.Although，therefore，a mandamus may be directed to courts，yet to issue such a writ to an officer for the delivery of a paper，is in effect the same as to sustain an original action for that paper，and，therefore，seems not to belong to appellate，but to original jurisdiction. Neither is it necessary in such a case as this，to enable the court to exercise its appellate jurisdiction. The authority，therefore，given to the supreme court，by the act establishing the judicial courts of the United States，to issue writs of mandamus to public officers，appears not to be warranted by the constitution；and it becomes necessary to inquire whether a jurisdiction so conferred can be exercised. The question，whether an act，repugnant to the constitution，can become the law of the land，is a question deeply interesting to the United States；but，happily，not of an intricacy proportioned to its interest.It seems only necessary to recognise certain principles，supposed to have been long and well established，to decide it. That the people have an original right to establish，for their future government，such principles as，in their opinion，shall most conduce to their own happiness is the basis on which the whole American fabric has been erected. The exercise of this original right is a very great exertion；nor can it，nor ought it，to be frequently repeated.The principles，therefore，so established，are deemed fundamental.And as the authority from which they proceed is supreme，and can seldom act，they are designed to be permanent. This original and supreme will organizes the government，and assigns to different departments their respective powers.It may either stop here，or establish certain limits not to be transcended by those departments. ……
法律英語泛讀教程(上) 作者簡介
張法連，1969年1月生，山東聊城人，中國政法大學外國語學院教授、碩士生導師，并在多所高校兼職博導，全國法律英語學科知名教授。
書友推薦
- >
自卑與超越
- >
上帝之肋:男人的真實旅程
- >
企鵝口袋書系列·偉大的思想20:論自然選擇(英漢雙語)
- >
姑媽的寶刀
- >
大紅狗在馬戲團-大紅狗克里弗-助人
- >
有舍有得是人生
- >
二體千字文
- >
中國人在烏蘇里邊疆區:歷史與人類學概述
本類暢銷
