美國憲法應(yīng)該改革嗎?（三）

Alicia Czechowski
Why do you think the U.S. Constitution can or cannot be revised entirely?
Revision of the U.S. Constitution is already in sight, The Koch brothers are underwriting austerity groups moving to rewrite the Constitution. Twenty-nine states have already passed resolutions to convene a convention. Seven more states targeted by austerity advocates will bring the number for ratification up to the required 38 states.
The legislative push may nominally be for the purpose of a balanced budget amendment and limiting the power and jurisdiction of the federal government, but once the convention is underway, it can make up its own rules.
Texas governor Greg Abbott has called the Convention of States resolution an “emergency issue” and has published a 70 page plan aimed at severely limiting federal power, even allowing a two-thirds majority of states to override a Supreme Court ruling or federal law.
If it happens, it will be a runaway convention. Common Cause, the Center for Media and Democracy and other groups have raised the alarm about the efforts to call an open constitutional convention.
In 8 years the USA may not even make the pretense of being a democracy.

為什么你認(rèn)為美國憲法可以或者不能完全修改？
美國憲法的修改已經(jīng)近在眼前，科赫兄弟正在資助緊縮政策組織重寫憲法。29個(gè)州已經(jīng)通過召開會(huì)議的決議。又有七個(gè)州成為緊縮政策倡導(dǎo)者的目標(biāo)，如此將使批準(zhǔn)該法案的州的數(shù)量達(dá)到所需的38個(gè)。
名義上，推動(dòng)立法可能是為了平衡預(yù)算修正案，限制聯(lián)邦政府的權(quán)力和管轄權(quán)，但一旦會(huì)議開始，它就可以制定自己的規(guī)則。
得克薩斯州州長格雷格·阿博特稱州大會(huì)決議是“緊急問題”，并發(fā)布了一份70頁的計(jì)劃，旨在嚴(yán)格限制聯(lián)邦權(quán)力，甚至允許三分之二的州推翻最高法院的裁決或聯(lián)邦法律。
如果真的發(fā)生了，那將是一場失控的大會(huì)。共同事業(yè)、媒體與民主中心和其他組織對努力呼吁召開公開制憲會(huì)議一事發(fā)出了警告。
8年后，美國甚至可能不會(huì)假裝是一個(gè)民主國家。

Joseph Spina
What are the reasons why the U.S. Constitution has not been done away with in favor of a more modern constitution?
There are a variety of reasons:
There is no legal mechanism to do so. You can amend the constitution, but not outright replace it.
If the federal government were abolished, full sovereignty returns to the states. Given the wildly divergent social and legal desires of the different states, I strongly doubt they would agree to join another unx.
You say ‘modern’ as though there were a clear meaning as to what that constitutes. There is not. What one person calls progress, another person calls regression. What one person calls improvement, another calls draconian. And given that people want to replace the constitution because it doesn’t let one portion of the population impose its interpretation on another, it’s hard to imagine the states agreeing to either being coerced harder, or to let others get away with more.
STOP FIxiNG THINGS THAT AREN’T BROKEN. Really, that’s how you wind up with things that really are broken. The Constitution was written wisely, and with a lot of thought. It has stood the test of time. It doesn’t need replacement - it needs to be observed.
There is nothing out dated about the constitution. Government isn’t software that needs an upxe every 6 months to function properly.

為什么美國憲法沒有被廢除，取而代之的是一部更現(xiàn)代的憲法?
原因有很多:
沒有這樣做的法律機(jī)制。你可以修改憲法，但不能完全取代它。
如果聯(lián)邦政府被廢除，完全的主權(quán)將回到各州?？紤]到不同州在社會(huì)和法律方面的巨大差異，我強(qiáng)烈懷疑它們是否會(huì)同意加入另一個(gè)聯(lián)盟。
你說“現(xiàn)代”，這就好像它的構(gòu)成有一個(gè)明確的含義似的，實(shí)際上是沒有的。一個(gè)人稱之為進(jìn)步，另一個(gè)人則稱之為倒退。一個(gè)人稱之為改進(jìn)，另一個(gè)人則稱之為苛刻。鑒于人們想要替換憲法，因?yàn)樗粫?huì)讓一部分人把自己的解釋強(qiáng)加給另一部分人，很難想象各州會(huì)同意要么受到更嚴(yán)厲的脅迫，要么讓其他州逃脫更多的懲罰。
停止修理那些沒有壞掉的東西。真的，這就是為什么你會(huì)得到真正壞掉的東西的原因。制定憲法時(shí)很明智，且經(jīng)過了深思熟慮，它經(jīng)受住了時(shí)間的考驗(yàn)，它不需要更換，它需要被觀察。
憲法沒有過時(shí)的地方，政府不是需要每6個(gè)月更新一次才能正常工作的軟件。

Mark Binfield
What sucks about the US Constitution?
Instead of my own opinion, I'll relay the comment I heard Justice Scalia offer in a radio interview, in response to a similar question.
He suggested that the Constitution's provisions for amendment are outdated, because they make it far too hard to upxe the Constitution. They made sense when the Constitution was first drafted and there were far fewer states. But Scalia calculated that today, given the number of states, the large size disparity between them, and the 3/4 threshold for state ratification, opposition from as little as 2% of the US population could be enough to block an amendment. Scalia believes, and for what it's worth I would agree with him, that the frxrs of the Constitution never intended for it to become quite that inflexible a document.

美國憲法有什么不好的地方？
在此，我將轉(zhuǎn)達(dá)斯卡利亞大法官在一次電臺(tái)采訪中回答類似問題時(shí)的言論作為評論，而不是講出我自己的觀點(diǎn)。
他表示，《憲法》的修正條款已經(jīng)過時(shí)，因?yàn)樗鼈兪垢隆稇椃ā纷兊锰y了。當(dāng)憲法剛起草時(shí)，它們是有道理的，而且州的數(shù)量要少得多。但斯卡利亞計(jì)算出，今天，考慮到各州的數(shù)量、各州之間的巨大規(guī)模差異，以及要達(dá)到3/4的州數(shù)量批準(zhǔn)的門檻，哪怕只有2%的美國人反對，也足以阻止一項(xiàng)修正案被通過。值得一提的是，我同意他的觀點(diǎn)，斯卡利亞認(rèn)為，憲法的制定者從未打算讓它成為一份如此不靈活的文件。
原創(chuàng)翻譯：龍騰網(wǎng) http://www.top-shui.cn 轉(zhuǎn)載請注明出處

Stephen L
Can the Constitution of The United States of American be rewritten?
Of course. It was created by humans, so it certainly can be altered by humans.
It has been altered 26 times, through the amendment process articulated in the document itself, although technically the first ten amendments came out together and are known collectively as the Bill of Rights.
It may also be “rewritten” through the calling of a constitutional convention, which may be initiated by the states themselves. However, a constitutional convention might net end in a rewrite, but in a complete scrapping of the entire document, or any number of scenarios in between.
After all, that’s how the Constitution itself came into being — through a convention called to address the flaws in the Articles of Confederation.

美利堅(jiān)合眾國的憲法可以改寫嗎？
當(dāng)然，它是由人類創(chuàng)造的，所以它肯定可以被人類修改。
通過文件本身所闡述的修正過程，它已經(jīng)被修改了26次，盡管從理論上講，前十次修正是一起提出的，統(tǒng)稱為《權(quán)利法案》。
它也可能通過制憲會(huì)議的呼吁被“修正”，制憲會(huì)議可能由各州自己發(fā)起。然而，制憲會(huì)議最終可能會(huì)以重寫而告終，但可能會(huì)徹底廢除整個(gè)文件，或者介于兩者之間的任何情況。
畢竟，這就是憲法本身是如何形成的——通過一次會(huì)議來解決《邦聯(lián)條例》中的缺陷。

Rick Ferrara
Does the United States need a new constitution?
No, the Constitution establishes The frxwork for our Nation. It is one of the most important documents in the history of the planet.
Do we really need to revise the First Amendment? Which part of free speech do we need to take away from people?
Some people really want to do away with the Second Amendment, which states that the People have the right to bear arms - however, they do not and never will represent the majority of Americans, despite what the manipulated polling attempts to tell us. If enough people want to amend this provision, the constitution has a process by which that can occur, but it is (as it should be) complex. The Constitution should not be easily modified, too much is at stake.
Third Amendment: American’s should not have to quarter soldiers in their homes. Really? What part of this do you want to change?
4th Amendment: Protection against illegal search and seizure. Again, why change this, the concept is simple and we have 250 years of case law to expand it to modern times.
5th Amendment : Protection against self-incrimination, double jeopardy. Protection of due process and right to a grand jury. Same thing… 250 years of case law has modernized this one… just like all the rest…

美國需要新憲法嗎？
不，憲法確立了我們國家的框架，它是地球歷史上最重要的文獻(xiàn)之一。
我們真的需要修改第一修正案嗎？我們需要?jiǎng)儕Z人們言論自由的哪一部分？
有些人真的想廢除第二修正案，該修正案規(guī)定人民有權(quán)攜帶武器-然而，盡管被操縱的民意調(diào)查試圖告訴我們些什么，他們現(xiàn)在不能也永遠(yuǎn)不能代表大多數(shù)美國人。如果有足夠多的人想要修改這一條款，憲法有一個(gè)可以實(shí)現(xiàn)的程序，但它是(應(yīng)該是)復(fù)雜的。憲法不應(yīng)該被輕易修改，因?yàn)樘ｋU(xiǎn)了。
第三修正案：美國人不應(yīng)該把士兵安置在家里。真的嗎？你想改變其中的哪一部分？
第四修正案：防止非法搜查和扣押。同樣，為什么要改變這一點(diǎn)，這個(gè)概念很簡單，我們有250年的判例法將其擴(kuò)展到現(xiàn)代。
第五修正案：防止自證其罪，雙重危險(xiǎn)。保護(hù)正當(dāng)訴訟程序和大陪審團(tuán)的權(quán)利。250年的判例法讓這個(gè)案子現(xiàn)代化了，就像其他修正案一樣。

6th Amendment : Right to speedy and public trial, impartial jury and right to counsel. There is a pattern here… no need to modify this…
We could go on and on… Protection from self-incrimination (5th A), Right to a speedy trial (6th A), Right to a trail by jury (7th A), No cruel and unusual punishment (8th), A prohibition that the rights in the Constitution will not be used against the People (9th A) and the 10th A: Reserved Powers to the States.
Amendments 11 through 27 did things like free the slaves and gave them citizenship, the right to vote (Black men), established Income Taxes, put prohibition into place and then later removed it, Gave Women the right to vote, limited the President to two terms and made the election of our Senators a direct election… and a few more things like gave 18-year-olds the right to vote.
What you don’t see here is the 1978 Equal Rights Amendment, which FAILED to get the required votes to be made part of the Constitution. In 2020, the idea that the required number of states could not or would not vote in the required number of years is hard to believe, but that is what happened. We will hopefully see that amendment passed one day.
So, out of all of these, the only Amendment that some people seem to have anxiety about is the 2nd Amendment. Few are going to argue about doing away with Double Jeopardy… or having to quarter soldiers in their homes - but some of these zealots would likely agree to throw the entire Constitution out to simply get rid of that pesky amendment. It really pisses them off that it’s #2 on the list… was pretty darn important to our Founders.

第六修正案：獲得快速公開審判的權(quán)利、公正的陪審團(tuán)和獲得律師的權(quán)利。這里有一個(gè)模式，不需要修改。
我們可以繼續(xù)……免于自證其罪的保護(hù)(第5條A)，迅速審判的權(quán)利(第6條A)，陪審團(tuán)審判的權(quán)利(第7條A)，不得殘酷和不尋常的懲罰(第8條)，禁止憲法中的權(quán)利不得用于反對人民(第9條A)和第10條A:各州保留的權(quán)力。
第11至27號修正案做了一些事情，比如解放奴隸，賦予他們公民身份，投票權(quán)（黑人男性），設(shè)立所得稅，實(shí)施禁令，然后取消，賦予女性投票權(quán)，將總統(tǒng)任期限制在兩屆，并將參議員選舉定為直接選舉……還有一些事情，例如賦予18歲的人投票權(quán)。
你在這里看不到的是1978年的《平等權(quán)利修正案》，該修正案未能獲得成為憲法一部分所需的選票。在2020年，在規(guī)定的年限內(nèi)，有規(guī)定數(shù)量的州不能或不愿投票的想法很難讓人相信，但事實(shí)就是如此。我們希望有一天能看到修正案獲得通過。
因此，在所有這些修正案中，一些人似乎唯一擔(dān)心的修正案是第二修正案。很少有人會(huì)反對廢除雙重危險(xiǎn)審判……或者必須把士兵安置在家里——但這些狂熱分子中的一些人可能會(huì)同意拋棄整個(gè)憲法，只是為了擺脫這個(gè)討厭的修正案。這真的讓他們很生氣，它在名單上排名第二，對我們的創(chuàng)始人來說非常重要。

William Connell Cawthon Jr.
Should any of the amendments to the US Constitution be changed? If so, which ones and why?
I would like to see the Second Amendment simplified to “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” This would remove confusion or willful misinterpretation.
I would like to see a new amendment redefining the limits of the federal government under the Commerce Clause. Ever since Wickard v. Fowler was decided in 1942, the federal government has been encroaching on reserved to the states by the Tenth Amendment.
It sounds a bit frivolous, but I would like to see an amendment that modifies the requirements to be elected to Congress. I believe every person running for a national legislative office should be able to pass a test showing that they have a thorough understanding of the United States Constitution. If one wishes to be a part of shaping the nation’s laws, it’s reasonable to expect them to know the legal foundation for them.

美國憲法的任何修正案都應(yīng)該修改嗎?如果有，是哪些，為什么?
我希望將第二修正案簡化為“人民持有和攜帶武器的權(quán)利不受侵犯”，這將消除混淆或故意的誤解的情況。
我希望看到一項(xiàng)新的修正案，根據(jù)《商業(yè)條款》重新界定聯(lián)邦政府的權(quán)限。自從1942年威卡德訴福勒案判決以來，聯(lián)邦政府一直在侵犯憲法第十修正案對各州保留的權(quán)利。
這聽起來有點(diǎn)不嚴(yán)肅，但我希望看到一項(xiàng)修正案，修改當(dāng)選國會(huì)議員的要求。我認(rèn)為，每一個(gè)競選國家立法職位的人都應(yīng)該能夠通過一項(xiàng)測試，表明他們對美國憲法有著透徹的理解。如果一個(gè)人希望參與國家法律的制定，那么期望他們了解這些法律的法律基礎(chǔ)是合理的。

William Redmond
Should we rewrite the US constitution?
It does not need to be rewritten, only slightly modified to rein in the Federal Government from sucking all power to itself. It has bloated itself into a monster that considers itself morally superior to the American citizenry, which, on the face of it, it a complete absurdity.

我們應(yīng)該重寫美國憲法嗎？
它不需要重寫，只需要稍微修改一下，就可以控制聯(lián)邦政府將所有權(quán)力吸走，聯(lián)邦政府已經(jīng)膨脹成一個(gè)怪物了，認(rèn)為自己在道德上優(yōu)于美國公民，從表面上看，這完全是荒謬的。

Mark Lorenz
Should the US "modernize" the Constitution?
Thanks for the A2A
We need to be careful here. Nothing of course is ever perfect, so changes are needed at times…and they have been made. The process is purposely difficult and thank goodness for that. There have been and continue to be so many proposals that if it were easier we'd be living on legal shifting sands on a regular basis.
Add to that our current (2017) arguments about how our country should be run, many of them bad ideas like identity politics and race baiting, that we risk these bad ideas making it into the foundation of our country.
The original intent was that local and state ideas can be tried out and often only used where people want those changes without forcing them on all of us. That's why e.g. someone living in San Francisco won't be as comfortable living in Alabama. And that's ok. Changing the constitution is a big government one-size-fits-all type of move and should therefore be used sparingly.
Bottom line: we don't need to change the constitution much, nor should we want to.

美國應(yīng)該讓憲法“現(xiàn)代化”嗎？
感謝邀請回答
我們得小心點(diǎn)。當(dāng)然，沒有什么是完美的，所以有時(shí)需要改變，而且已經(jīng)做出了改變。這個(gè)修正過程被故意設(shè)置得很困難，謝天謝地。已經(jīng)有并將繼續(xù)有非常多的提議，如果更容易的話，我們將定期生活在合法的流沙（不斷變化且難以預(yù)測的政治局勢）上。
除此之外，我們目前（2017年）關(guān)于我們的國家應(yīng)該如何管理的爭論，其中許多是錯(cuò)誤的想法，如身份政治和種族煽動(dòng)，我們冒著這些錯(cuò)誤想法成為我們國家基礎(chǔ)的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。
最初的意圖是，地方和州的想法可以嘗試，并且通常只在人們想要這些改變的地方使用，而不是強(qiáng)迫我們所有人接受它們。這就是為什么住在舊金山的人在阿拉巴馬州生活會(huì)不那么舒服，這沒關(guān)系。修改憲法是一個(gè)大政府一刀切的舉措，因此應(yīng)該謹(jǐn)慎使用。
一句話：我們不需要修改憲法，也不應(yīng)該這么做。

Tony Zanichkowsky
Could the US constitution theoretically be amended or overhauled to better address current times and circumstances?
Why don't you instead, embrace the Constitution as it is.
You realize, right, that the Constitution was deliberately designed to be very difficult to amend, because the Founders thought it fruitless and dangerous, to constantly alter the founding laws and structure of our country to adapt it to ever changing times and circumstances.
You're supposed to adapt yourself to the Constitution, not the other way around. Learn to embrace the genius of the men who designed this republic.
They were far better statesmen than any currently serving in public office.

從理論上講，美國憲法是否可以進(jìn)行修改或徹底改革，以更好地適應(yīng)當(dāng)前的時(shí)代和環(huán)境？
你為什么不接受現(xiàn)行的憲法呢?
你知道的，憲法是故意設(shè)計(jì)成很難修改的，因?yàn)殚_國元?jiǎng)讉冋J(rèn)為不斷修改我們國家的建國法律和結(jié)構(gòu)以適應(yīng)不斷變化的時(shí)代和環(huán)境是徒勞和危險(xiǎn)的。
你應(yīng)該讓自己適應(yīng)憲法，而不是相反。
學(xué)會(huì)擁抱設(shè)計(jì)這個(gè)共和國的天才們吧。
他們是比任何一位現(xiàn)任公職人員都要好得多的政治家。

Chuck Sears
How many Constitutions of the United States are there?
Assuming that the question comes from a US citizen...questions like this make me say we need to go back to teaching Civics in high school. If people learned about the Constitution and how our government works, they would understand that there is only one Constitution of the USA and it is the supreme law of the land.
Questions like this also scare the hell out of me because people who are so ignorant of our government are also the ones voting on our government.
If you are not a US citizen, my apologies for the somewhat rough tone of the post. It really saddens me how many people in this country have no clue whatsoever how our government works.

美國有多少部憲法?
假設(shè)這個(gè)問題來自美國公民，這樣的問題讓我覺得我們需要回到高中教公民學(xué)。如果人們了解了憲法和我們的政府是如何運(yùn)作的，他們就會(huì)明白美國只有一部憲法，它是美國的最高法律。
像這樣的問題也把我嚇壞了，因?yàn)槟切ξ覀兊恼绱藷o知的人也是對我們的政府投票的人
如果你不是美國公民，我為這篇文章有些粗魯?shù)恼Z氣道歉。這個(gè)國家有不少人完全不知道我們的政府是如何運(yùn)作的，這讓我很難過。

Lynn Fredricks
Should we rewrite the US constitution?
No, the US Constitution is near perfect as it is. It also offers a grand template for avoiding many forms of tyranny.
Where it isn’t perfect, the Constitution can be extended and modified with amendments.

我們應(yīng)該重寫美國憲法嗎？
不，美國憲法雖然近乎完美，但它也為避免多種形式的暴政提供了一個(gè)宏偉的模板。
至于不完善的地方，憲法可以通過修正案進(jìn)行擴(kuò)展和修改。

Matt Riggsby
If some Americans want to alter the Constitution, how?
How, as in by what method? There’s a process for amending the Constitution built in, and we’ve used it over twenty times. There are a couple of ways it can happen, but it boils down to supermajority support.
How, as in in what way? There’s a range of things which various people would like changed. There are racists who would like to see an end to birthright citizenship, fiscal conservatives who want to require a balanced budget, and proponents of democracy who would like to see the Electoral College abolished and voting established as a fundamental right. There are, really, too many proposed amendments to even begin to list.

如果一些美國人想修改憲法，怎么做？
如何修改，如通過什么方法修改？有一個(gè)修改憲法的程序，我們已經(jīng)使用了20多次。有幾種方式可以實(shí)現(xiàn)，但歸根結(jié)底的是絕大多數(shù)人支持現(xiàn)行憲法。
如何修改，以何種方式修改？不同的人希望改變的事情有很多。有些種族主義者希望終結(jié)與生俱來的公民權(quán)，有些財(cái)政保守派希望看到預(yù)算平衡，還有民主支持者希望看到選舉團(tuán)被廢除，投票權(quán)被確立為一項(xiàng)基本權(quán)利。事實(shí)上，有太多的擬議修正案甚至無法列出。