| dc.contributor | 法律系 | |
| dc.creator (作者) | 廖元豪 | |
| dc.creator (作者) | Liao, Bruce Yuan-Hao | |
| dc.date (日期) | 2024-06 | |
| dc.date.accessioned | 29-Nov-2024 14:03:58 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.available | 29-Nov-2024 14:03:58 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.date.issued (上傳時間) | 29-Nov-2024 14:03:58 (UTC+8) | - |
| dc.identifier.uri (URI) | https://nccur.lib.nccu.edu.tw/handle/140.119/154530 | - |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | 美國最高法院在2023年，將哈佛大學與北卡大學優先錄取弱勢族群的招生措施宣告違憲。各大學為確保弱勢群體實質平，往往都採取此類「積極平權措施」；然而也因為積極平權措施就會考慮申請人的種族身分，因而構成種族分類而與憲法的形式平等保障產生緊張關係。本文即從美國憲法的背景，介紹並分析最高法院此一判決。同時也展望，在最高法院採取強烈形式平等途徑之後，大學入學以外的積極平權措施也可能遭到質疑及挑戰。 | |
| dc.description.abstract (摘要) | The U.S. Supreme Court’s 2023 decision, Students for Fair Admissions v. Harvard, in use of a highly formalist equality approach, stroke down the race-conscious admissions policies of Harvard college and UNC. To ensure the substantive equality of minority students, many higher education institutions have adopted similar affirmative action programs for decades. Such admissions policy became more vulnerable because they always consider applicants’race/ethnicity status so as to make them“racial classification”and must be subjected to strict scrutiny. This article introduces and analyzes SFFA decision in light of American constitutional law, and then predicts the future impact and trend. | |
| dc.format.extent | 105 bytes | - |
| dc.format.mimetype | text/html | - |
| dc.relation (關聯) | 月旦法學雜誌, No.349, pp.27-47 | |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | 積極平權措施; 種族平等; 形式平等; 實質平等; 色盲論 | |
| dc.subject (關鍵詞) | Affirmative action; Racial equality; Formal equality; Substantive equality; Color-blind jurisprudence | |
| dc.title (題名) | 優先錄取弱勢族群乃是種族歧視？—美國最高法院鞏固「形式平等」論的新判決 | |
| dc.title (題名) | Is Preferential Admissions Policy for Minorities Racial Discrimination?: SFFA v. Harvard Entrenched the Formal Equality Jurisprudence | |
| dc.type (資料類型) | article | |
| dc.identifier.doi (DOI) | 10.53106/1025593134902 | |
| dc.doi.uri (DOI) | https://dx.doi.org/10.53106/1025593134902 | |
