Hukum Amerika Serikat: Perbedaan antara revisi
Konten dihapus Konten ditambahkan
Tidak ada ringkasan suntingan |
Tidak ada ringkasan suntingan |
||
Baris 3:
==Tinjauan umum ==
=== Sumber-sumber hukum ===
Di Amerika Serikat, ada empat sumber hukum, yaitu [[Hukum konstitusi Amerika Serikat|hukum konstitusi]], [[hukum administratif]], [[statuta]] (hukum resmi yang tertulis di suatu negara), dan common law (yang mencakup [[hukum kasus]]). Sumber hukum yang terpenting adalah [[Konstitusi Amerika Serikat]], dan segala sesuatu berada di bawahnya, dan takluk kepadanya. Tak boleh ada hukum yang berkontradiksi dengan [[Konstitusi Amerika Serikat]]. Misalnya, bila Kongres menyetujui sebuah statuta yang berlawanan dengan konstitusi, maka [[Mahkamah Agung]] dapat menganggap hukum itu [[inkonstitusional]] dan membatalkannya.
===
Meskipun Amerika Serikat dan kebanyakan negara-negara [[Persemakmuran]] mewarisi tradisional [[common law]], dari sistem [[hukum Inggris]], hukum Amerika cenderung unik dalam banyak hal. Ini disebabkan karena system hukum Amerika terputus dari system hukum Britania karena revolusi kemerdekaan negara ini, dan setelah itu ia berkembang secara mandiri dari system hukum Persemakmuran Britania. Oleh karena itu, bila kita mencoba menelusuri perkembangan prinsip-prinsip common law yang tradisional dibuat oleh para hakim, artinya, sejumlah kecil hukum yang belum dibatalkan oleh hukum-hukum yang lebih baru, maka peradilan peradilan Amerika akan melihat kepada kasus-kasus di Britania hanya sampai ke awal abad ke-19.
▲Although the courts of the various Commonwealth nations are often influenced by each other's rulings, American courts rarely follow post-Revolution Commonwealth rulings unless there is no American ruling on point, the facts and law at issue are nearly identical, and the reasoning is strongly persuasive. The earliest American cases, even after the Revolution, often did cite contemporary British cases, but such citations gradually disappeared during the 19th century as American courts developed their own principles to resolve the legal problems of the American people.<ref>Elizabeth Gaspar Brown, "Frontier Justice: Wayne County 1796-1836," in ''Essays in Nineteenth-Century American Legal History'', ed. Wythe Holt, 676-703 (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1976): 686. Between 1808 and 1828, the briefs filed in court cases in the [[Territory of Michigan]] changed from a complete reliance on English sources of law to an increasing reliance on citations to American sources.</ref> Today, the vast majority of American legal citations are to domestic cases. Sometimes, courts, and [[casebook]] editors, do make exceptions for opinions on issues of first impression by brilliant British jurists, like [[William Blackstone]] or [[Lord Denning]].
Some adherents of [[originalism]] and [[strict constructionism]] such as Justice [[Antonin Scalia]] of the [[United States Supreme Court]] argue that American courts should ''never'' look for guidance to post-Revolution cases from legal systems outside of the United States, regardless of whether the reasoning is persuasive, with the sole exception of cases interpreting international [[treaty|treaties]] to which the United States is a signatory. Others, such as Justices [[Anthony Kennedy]] and [[Stephen Breyer]], disagree, and cite foreign law from time to time, where they believe it is persuasive, useful or helpful.
| |||