本文選題：懲治叛亂法 + 約翰·亞當斯��； 參考：《山東大學(xué)》2011年碩士論文

【摘要】：1798年,美國聯(lián)邦黨人為了解決當時美國面臨的內(nèi)憂外患問題,推動美國國會通過了《懲治叛亂法》(The Sedition Act)。對《懲治叛亂法》進行研究,有助于我們思考一個民主政府在面對國內(nèi)外危機時如何應(yīng)對合宜的問題。 本文將對美國1798年《懲治叛亂法》出臺的歷史背景、國會辯論、司法實踐以及最終失效等問題做一整體論述。全文約三萬字,共分為四個部分。 第一部分,《懲治叛亂法》出臺的歷史背景。自美國建國以來,聯(lián)邦黨人和民主共和黨人在政見上存在著巨大分歧,隨著法國革命的逐步深入,雙方圍繞美法關(guān)系展開了激烈討論。在美法關(guān)系破裂并進入“準戰(zhàn)爭”的情況下,聯(lián)邦黨人面對內(nèi)憂外患,決心立刻采取措施穩(wěn)定國內(nèi)局勢。 第二部分,《懲治叛亂法》的出臺。這部分討論了《懲治叛亂法》的主要內(nèi)容以及國會關(guān)于《懲治叛亂法》的激烈辯論,以此來說明聯(lián)邦黨人和民主共和黨人對《懲治叛亂法》的基本看法。 第三部分,《懲治叛亂法》的司法實踐。這部分以聯(lián)邦法院的巡回法官們根據(jù)《懲治叛亂法》做出的三個“最臭名昭著”的審判為例來說明聯(lián)邦黨人推行《懲治叛亂法》的方法,這是聯(lián)邦黨人和民主共和黨人的又一輪交鋒,雖然這些審判的結(jié)果是聯(lián)邦黨人所期盼的,但是卻沒有達到聯(lián)邦黨人的目的。 第四部分,《懲治叛亂法》的失效�！稇椭闻褋y法》是必要的,但是由于它的規(guī)定與聯(lián)邦憲法相違背,因而缺乏堅實的憲法基礎(chǔ)。民主共和黨人以此為突破口,最終取得了1800年大選的勝利。而聯(lián)邦黨人因《懲治叛亂法》聲名狼藉,在1800年選舉中不僅失去了總統(tǒng)寶座,還失去了在國會的優(yōu)勢。民主共和黨人執(zhí)政以后,《懲治叛亂法》沒有得到延續(xù),有效期滿自動廢止
[Abstract]:In 1798, in order to solve the internal and external problems facing the United States, the United States Federalists pushed the Congress to pass the Sedition Act). The study of the Anti-Rebellion Law is helpful for us to think about how a democratic government should deal with the appropriate problems in the face of domestic and foreign crises. This paper deals with the historical background, the debate in Congress, the judicial practice and the final invalidation of the Anti-Rebellion Act of 1798 in the United States. The full text about 30,000 words, a total of four parts. The first part, the historical background of the Anti-Rebellion Law. Since the founding of the United States, there have been great differences in political views between the federalists and the democratic Republicans. With the deepening of the French Revolution, the two sides have launched a heated discussion about the US-France relationship. With relations between the United States and France falling apart and entering a "quasi war," the federalists, faced with internal and external troubles, resolved to take immediate steps to stabilize the situation at home. The second part is the promulgation of the Anti-Rebellion Law. This part discusses the main contents of the Anti-Rebellion Act and the fierce debate in Congress on the Anti-Rebellion Law, which is used to explain the basic views of the Federalists and the Democratic Republicans on the Anti-Rebellion Law. The third part, the judicial practice of the Anti-Rebellion Law. This part takes the three "most notorious" trials handed down by circuit judges in federal courts under the Anti-Rebellion Act as an example of the way in which the Federalists enforce the Anti-Rebellion Act. This is another round of confrontation between the Federalists and the Democratic Republicans, and while the outcome of these trials is expected by the Federalists, it has failed to achieve the goals of the Federalists. The fourth part is the invalidation of the Anti-Rebellion Law, which is necessary, but it lacks a solid constitutional foundation because its provisions are contrary to the Federal Constitution. The Democrats took this as a breakthrough and finally won the 1800 election. The Federalists, notorious for the Rebellion Act, lost not only the presidency but also Congress in the 1800 election. After the Democratic Republican Party came to power, the Anti-Rebellion Law was not renewed and automatically repealed
【學(xué)位授予單位】：山東大學(xué)
【學(xué)位級別】：碩士
【學(xué)位授予年份】：2011
【分類號】：D971.2;DD911

【參考文獻】

相關(guān)期刊論文 前2條

1 任東來;美國早期憲政史上的聯(lián)邦法令廢止權(quán)[J];美國研究;2001年02期

2 李龍;試論美國1798年《懲治煽動叛亂法案》[J];株洲師范高等�？茖W(xué)校學(xué)報;2004年06期

相關(guān)碩士學(xué)位論文 前2條

1 杜憲兵;亞當斯與杰斐遜關(guān)系之研究[D];山東師范大學(xué);2003年

2 彭俊;約翰·亞當斯與美國保守主義的起源[D];華東師范大學(xué);2006年

，

本文編號：2097306