论文部分内容阅读
美国传统的法律选择方法强调以确定性规则为中心地位,但自20世纪中期以来,以方法为导向的观点占据了主流,冲突法革命和《第二次冲突法重述》成为了现代美国法律选择体系的代表。然而在21世纪到来之后,司法实践中法律选择的混乱情形引发了当代法律选择方法应然性的理论论争.。在这场尚无定论的论争中,以制定《第三次冲突法重述》为契机,实体法方法、规则优先主义、方法优先主义以及经验研究学派四种主要观点从不同角度尝试构建当代美国法律选择方法的新蓝图。
The traditional method of legal choice in the United States emphasizes the centrality of certainty rules, but since the mid-20th century a methodologically oriented view prevailed and the law of the conflict and the restatement of the Second Conflict of Law became modern American law Choose the system’s representative. However, after the advent of the 21st century, the chaotic situation of legal choice in judicial practice has triggered a theoretical debate over the appropriateness of contemporary legal choice methods. In this controversial debate, taking the opportunity of formulating the “restatement of the Third Conflict of Law” as an opportunity, the four main ideas of substantive law, rule prioritization, method prioritization and empirical research are trying to construct the contemporary United States from different angles New blueprint for the method of law selection.