扫一扫
关注中图网
官方微博
本类五星书更多>
-
>
中医基础理论
-
>
高校军事课教程
-
>
思想道德与法治(2021年版)
-
>
毛泽东思想和中国特色社会主义理论体系概论(2021年版)
-
>
中医内科学·全国中医药行业高等教育“十四五”规划教材
-
>
中医诊断学--新世纪第五版
-
>
中药学·全国中医药行业高等教育“十四五”规划教材
法律英语泛读教程(上) 版权信息
- ISBN：9787301274989
- 条形码：9787301274989 ; 978-7-301-27498-9
- 装帧：一般胶版纸
- 册数：暂无
- 重量：暂无
- 所属分类：>>
法律英语泛读教程(上) 本书特色
美国法在世界范围内影响深远，学习研究美国法意义重大，这不仅表现为许多国家都在研究美国的法律规则，借鉴其成熟做法，还表现为许多国际公约也参照美国法的理念、原则、规则制定。因此，本书作为法律英语专业的泛读教材，主要选取了美国历史上*有影响的36个案例，按时间顺序编排，分上下两册，希望读者通过研读这些经典案例，了解法官判案推理过程和有关法律、法规的适用，更有利于学习标准的法律英语，也更容易掌握美国法的精髓。本书选取了十几个经典案例，以期*大程度的展现美国法原貌。
法律英语泛读教程(上) 内容简介
随着我国入世和世界经济一体化进程的不断加快，靠前交流合作日益增多，涉外法务活动少见频繁，法律英语的重要性日益凸显。掌握专业英语已经成为现代法律人推荐的职业素质。由于法律英语的特殊性。国内一直没有一个科学的考核指标衡量法律从业人员专业英语的掌握程度。法律英语证书（LEC）全国统一考试的推出为我国法律英语的教与学指明了方向。意义重大、影响深远。
法律英语泛读教程(上) 目录
001
002
[1]
目 录
CONTENTS
法 律 英 语 泛 读 教 程 （上）
目录
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
展开全部
法律英语泛读教程(上) 节选
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. ……
法律英语泛读教程(上) 作者简介
张法连，1969年1月生，山东聊城人，中国政法大学外国语学院教授、硕士生导师，并在多所高校兼职博导，全国法律英语学科知名教授。
书友推荐
- >
我从未如此眷恋人间
我从未如此眷恋人间
¥24.4¥49.8 - >
月亮与六便士
月亮与六便士
¥15.1¥42.0 - >
名家带你读鲁迅:故事新编
名家带你读鲁迅:故事新编
¥13.0¥26.0 - >
企鹅口袋书系列·伟大的思想20:论自然选择(英汉双语)
企鹅口袋书系列·伟大的思想20:论自然选择(英汉双语)
¥6.3¥14.0 - >
推拿
推拿
¥12.2¥32.0 - >
伯纳黛特,你要去哪(2021新版)
伯纳黛特,你要去哪(2021新版)
¥15.9¥49.8 - >
经典常谈
经典常谈
¥12.7¥39.8 - >
罗曼·罗兰读书随笔-精装
罗曼·罗兰读书随笔-精装
¥20.3¥58.0
