Alasdair Maclntyre, After Virtue: A Study in Moral Theory，University of Notre Dame Press, 2007, p. 216.
[2]
John Rawls, A Theory of Justice, Harvard University Press, 1999，pp. 4，6.
[3]
Michael Sandel，liberalism and the Limits of Justice , Cambridge University Press, 1998.
[4]
Michael Sandel， Democracy''s Discontent ： America in Search of a Public Philosophy, Harvard University Press, 1996, p.12.
[5]
MacIntyre, supra note 34,p.221.
[6]
Michael Walzer,“The Communitarian Critique of Liberalism”,18 Political Theory,p.7,（1990）.
[7]
Ibid.,at8.
[8]
Ibid.,at7-8.
[9]
Ibid.,at9.
[10]
共和主义在美国宪法学内的复兴，可参见《耶鲁法学杂志》（Yale Law Journal）在1988年第97卷的第8期，为“共和主义宪法理论”的专辑。
[11]
Frank Michelman,“Constitutional Authorship”,in Larry Alexander, ed.,Constitutionalism: Philosophical Foundations, Cambridge University Press,1998,p.67.
[12]
Michelman,supranote 6,pp.1500-1503.
[13]
Michelman, Brennen and Democracy, Princeton University Press,1999,pp.4-5.
[14]
Michelman, supranote6,p.1501.
[15]
Ibid.,at1506.
[16]
Ibid.,at1502.
[17]
Frank Michelman,“Traces of Self-Government”,100 Harvard Law Review,p.75,（1986）.
[18]
巴内特教授认为，我们人民不过是一种“虚构”，参见Randy Barnett,“Constitutional Legitimacy”, 103 Columbia Law Review,pp.111-148.,（2003）；斯特劳斯教授基于实用主义的立场否定存在着一种“世代相继的美国人民”：“今天的许多美国人并不会怀有对前代美国人的忠诚，他们与前代人之间没有关系或联系”，做一个美国人并不需要信仰“美国人民在历史进程中的统一性”或者“准种族的美国身份”。参见Strauss, supranote 28, pp.1723-1725。
[19]
此处的讨论受到“国王的两个身体”的启发，参见Ernst Kantorowicz, The King’s Two Bodies: A Study in Mediaeval Political Theology, Princeton University Press,1997。
[20]
（德）尼采：《历史的用途与滥用》，陈涛等译，上海人民出版社2005年版，页1-2。
[21]
Drew Gilp in Faust,This Republic of Sufferings:Death and the American Civil War, Knopf,2008,p.xiv.
[22]
Anthony Kronman,“Precedent and Tradition”,99 Yale Law Journal,p.1050.,（1990）.
Jed Rubenfeld, Freedom and Time ： A Theory of Constitutional Self-Government, Yale University Press，2001，p.18.
[64]
关于原旨主义的实证研究，可参见 Jamal Greene，Nathaniel Persily Stephen Ansolabehere， “Profiling Originalism”, 111 Columbia Law Review , pp. 356 — 418 , (2011)。
[65]
参见Frank Michelman,“Law’s Republic”,97 Yale Law Journal, pp.1493-1538,（1988）;Robert McCloskey & Sanford Levinson, The American Supreme Court, University of Chicago Press, 2010; Rubenfeld, supranote 4。
[66]
代表性的论述可参见Sanford Levinson, Our Undemocratic Constitution: Where the Constitution Goes Wrong（And How We the People Can Correct It）,Oxford University Press, 2006; Cass Sunstein, A Constitution of Many Minds: Why the Founding Document Doesn’t Mean What It Meant Before, Princeton University Press, 2009。
[67]
Zachary Elkins, Tom Ginsburg & James Melton, The Endurance of National Constitution, Cambridge University Press, 2009, p.2.
[68]
Robert Cover, “Nomos and Narrative”,97 Harvard Law Review,p.4,（1983）.
霍姆斯，见前注[10]，页228 — 230。将杰斐逊和潘恩放在一起的讨论，参见Gordon Wood，“The Radicalism of Thomas Jefferson and Thomas Paine Considered”, in Gordon Wood，The Idea of America ： Reflections on the Birth of the United States, Penguin Books, 2012, pp. 213 — 228。
[72]
转引自 Gordon Wood, The Creation of the American Re public，, 1776 —1787, University of North Carolina Press, 1998, p. 379。
[73]
AlisonLa Croix, “Temporal Imperialism”, 158 University of Pennsylvania Law Review, pp.1329-1374,（2010）.
关于宪法承诺的一般性讨论，即为什么写在羊皮纸上的宪法可以去约束掌握着枪杆子和钱袋子的政治力量，为什么多数派在宪法承诺不利于当下时仍选择服从，参见Daryl Levinson, “Parchment and Politics: The Positive Puzzle of Constitutional Commitment”, 124 Harvard Law Review, pp.657-746,（2011）。
[78]
关于先定承诺在社科以及政法理论中的讨论，参见Jon Elster， tionality，Pre-commitment，and Constraints，Cambridge University Press, 2000， pp. 88 一174 ； Jon Elster, ‘‘Don’t Bum Your Bridge Before You Come to It: Some Ambiguities and Complexities of Pre-commitment“，81 Texas Law Reviezv , pp. 1752 —1788，（2003)。
[79]
“框架式原旨主义”的论述，参见Jack Balkin, Living Originalism, Harvard University Press, 2011,pp.21-23。
Cass Sunstein,“Constitutionalism and Secession”,58 University of Chicago Law Review,p.641,（1991）.
[83]
McCullochv.Maryland,17U.S.316（1819）.
[84]
霍姆斯，见前注[10],页262。
[85]
关于死人之手的统治，可参见Adam Samaha,“Dead Hand Argument and Constitutional Interpre-tation”,108 Columbia Law Review, pp.607-680,（2008）。
[86]
严格说，斯卡利亚并非极端的原旨主义者，他认为“原旨主义”只是“更小的恶”，参见Antonin Scalia,“Originalism: The Lesser Evil”,57 University of Cincinnati Law Review, pp.849-866,（1989），正文所引出自Antonin Scalia, A Matter of Interpretation,Princeton University Press,1997,pp.40,145。
[87]
David Strauss,“Common Law, Common Ground, and Jefferson’s Principle”,112 Yale Law Journal, pp.1725,1734,（2003）.
[88]
“说服平台”，参见Balkin, supranote 20,pp.129-137。
[89]
参见 Akhil Amar，”The Consent of the Governed： Constitutional Amendment outside Article , 94 Columbia Law Review, pp. 45 7 — 508，（1994)。
Paul Brest， “The Misconceived Quest for the Original Understanding”, 60 Boston University Law Review, p. 225, (1980).
[92]
Randy Barnett, Restoring the Lost Constitution ： The Presum Ption of Liberty, Princeton University Press, 2003, p. 20.
[93]
林肯，见前注[90],页6-8。
[94]
林肯，见前注[90],页8。
[95]
J. Holmes, dissenting in Lochner v. New York,198U.S.45（1905）.
[96]
Gerald Rosenberg, The Hollow Hope: Can Courts Bring about Social Change? University of Chicago Press,2008.
[97]
例如参见Larry Alexander & Frederick Schauer,“On Extrajudicial Constitutional Interpretation”,110 Harvard Law Review, pp.1359-1387,（1997）.
[98]
Cover, supra note 9.
[99]
Ibid.,at40.
[100]
Ibid.,at53.
[101]
Ibid.,at14.
[102]
Jack Balkin, Constitutional Redemption: Political Faithinan Unjust World, Harvard University Press,2011,p.15.
[103]
转引自张千帆：《西方宪政体系》，中国政法大学出版社2000年版，页168。
[104]
（美）阿奇博尔德·考克斯：《法院与宪法》，田雷译，北京大学出版社2006年版，页31。
[105]
关于马歇尔法院与司法民族主义路线，可参见G. Edward White, The Marshall Court and Cultural Change, 1815-1835, Oxford University Press,1991；关于民族的定义者，参见Jean Edward Smith, John Marshall: Definer of a Nation, Henry Holtand Co.,1996。
[106]
关于宪法与正当性理论的评述，可参见Richard Fallon, “Legitimacy and the Constitution”,118 Harvard Law Review, pp.1787-1853,（2005）。
