RISS 학술연구정보서비스

검색

인기 검색어

    다국어 입력

    http://chineseinput.net/에서 pinyin(병음)방식으로 중국어를 변환할 수 있습니다.

    변환된 중국어를 복사하여 사용하시면 됩니다.

    예시)
    • 中文 을 입력하시려면 zhongwen을 입력하시고 space를누르시면됩니다.
    • 北京 을 입력하시려면 beijing을 입력하시고 space를 누르시면 됩니다.
    닫기
    KCI등재

    미국 상원의 행정부 공직후보자에 대한 인사청문회

    한글로보기

    https://www.riss.kr/link?id=A100520931

    • 0

      상세조회
    • 0

      다운로드
    서지정보 열기
    • 내보내기
    • 내책장담기
    • 공유하기
    • 오류접수

    부가정보

    다국어 초록 (Multilingual Abstract) kakao i 다국어 번역

    In the United States, confirmation hearing is a hearing held by the U.S. Senate to gather information on whether to approve or reject candidates for high federal office who are nominated by the president.
    Generally speaking, more circumspect and deferential is the Senates behavior toward Cabinet officers and other departmental positions. The record demonstrates that the Senate only infrequently rejects a nomination to an executive positions. On the other hand, the Senate is especially vigilant in reviewing nominations to the Supreme Court, rejecting of approximately one out of five. How are this Senates ambivalent attitude to be accepted?
    There is a need for deference because the President needs to have advisers that he or she can trust and who are ideologically compatible with the President since the officers are supposed to cooperate with the President and execute his programs. According to this theory, the doctrine that the President is entitled th a Cabinet of his own choice is broadly supported. On the contrary, the justice in the Supreme court is in a position to check presidential power. Therefore, it is justified that Congress takes account of not only individual qualifications but also partisan considerations in reviewing judicial nominees.
    I think that the National Assembly of Korea should learn from the U.S. Senate experience with the confirmation process. So, It is appropriate for members of the National Assembly to defer to the Presidents choice of executive officials. But they should do an aggressive review of governments official nominees who are required to maintain political neutrality, such as judicial nominees to the Supreme Court and Constitutional Court.
    번역하기

    In the United States, confirmation hearing is a hearing held by the U.S. Senate to gather information on whether to approve or reject candidates for high federal office who are nominated by the president. Generally speaking, more circumspect and de...

    In the United States, confirmation hearing is a hearing held by the U.S. Senate to gather information on whether to approve or reject candidates for high federal office who are nominated by the president.
    Generally speaking, more circumspect and deferential is the Senates behavior toward Cabinet officers and other departmental positions. The record demonstrates that the Senate only infrequently rejects a nomination to an executive positions. On the other hand, the Senate is especially vigilant in reviewing nominations to the Supreme Court, rejecting of approximately one out of five. How are this Senates ambivalent attitude to be accepted?
    There is a need for deference because the President needs to have advisers that he or she can trust and who are ideologically compatible with the President since the officers are supposed to cooperate with the President and execute his programs. According to this theory, the doctrine that the President is entitled th a Cabinet of his own choice is broadly supported. On the contrary, the justice in the Supreme court is in a position to check presidential power. Therefore, it is justified that Congress takes account of not only individual qualifications but also partisan considerations in reviewing judicial nominees.
    I think that the National Assembly of Korea should learn from the U.S. Senate experience with the confirmation process. So, It is appropriate for members of the National Assembly to defer to the Presidents choice of executive officials. But they should do an aggressive review of governments official nominees who are required to maintain political neutrality, such as judicial nominees to the Supreme Court and Constitutional Court.

    더보기

    참고문헌 (Reference)

    1 정일섭, "인사청문회제도에 대한 연구" 한국지방자치학회 15 (15): 2003

    2 권건보, "인사청문회제도에 대한 비교법적 고찰" 한국법제연구원 2012

    3 김일환, "미국 연방헌법상 인사청문회제도" 미국헌법학회 21 (21): 205-242, 2010

    4 강승식, "미국 연방대법원 대법관의 임명절차" 한국공법학회 35 (35): 81-102, 2006

    5 MacKenzie, G. Calvin, "The Politics of Presidential Appointments" Free Press 1980

    6 Wood, Gordon S., "The Creation of the American Republic 1776~1787" UNC Press 1998

    7 Carter, Stephen L., "The Confirmation Mess : Cleaning Up the Federal Appointments Process" Basic Books 1994

    8 Laski, Harold J., "The American Presidency : An Interpretation" Transaction Publishers 1980

    9 Foreman, Christopher H. Jr., "Signals From The Hill : Congressional Oversight and the Challenge of Social Regulation" Yale University Press 1988

    10 Fisher, Louis, "Constitutional Conflicts between Congress and the President" University Press of Kansas 2007

    1 정일섭, "인사청문회제도에 대한 연구" 한국지방자치학회 15 (15): 2003

    2 권건보, "인사청문회제도에 대한 비교법적 고찰" 한국법제연구원 2012

    3 김일환, "미국 연방헌법상 인사청문회제도" 미국헌법학회 21 (21): 205-242, 2010

    4 강승식, "미국 연방대법원 대법관의 임명절차" 한국공법학회 35 (35): 81-102, 2006

    5 MacKenzie, G. Calvin, "The Politics of Presidential Appointments" Free Press 1980

    6 Wood, Gordon S., "The Creation of the American Republic 1776~1787" UNC Press 1998

    7 Carter, Stephen L., "The Confirmation Mess : Cleaning Up the Federal Appointments Process" Basic Books 1994

    8 Laski, Harold J., "The American Presidency : An Interpretation" Transaction Publishers 1980

    9 Foreman, Christopher H. Jr., "Signals From The Hill : Congressional Oversight and the Challenge of Social Regulation" Yale University Press 1988

    10 Fisher, Louis, "Constitutional Conflicts between Congress and the President" University Press of Kansas 2007

    더보기

    동일학술지(권/호) 다른 논문

    동일학술지 더보기

    더보기

    분석정보

    View

    상세정보조회

    0

    Usage

    원문다운로드

    0

    대출신청

    0

    복사신청

    0

    EDDS신청

    0

    동일 주제 내 활용도 TOP

    더보기

    주제

    연도별 연구동향

    연도별 활용동향

    연관논문

    연구자 네트워크맵

    공동연구자 (7)

    유사연구자 (20) 활용도상위20명

    인용정보 인용지수 설명보기

    학술지 이력

    학술지 이력
    연월일 이력구분 이력상세 등재구분
    2028 평가 재인증평가 신청대상 (재인증)
    2022-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (재인증) KCI등재
    2019-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재
    2016-01-01 등재 등재학술지 유지 (계속평가) KCI등재
    2012-01-01 등재 등재학술지 선정 (등재후보2차) KCI등재
    2011-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2010-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 FAIL (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2009-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 유지 (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2008-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 유지 (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2007-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 유지 (등재후보2차) KCI등재후보
    2006-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 PASS (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2005-05-18 학술지등록 한글명 : 미국헌법연구
    외국어명 : Study on The American Constitution
    KCI등재후보
    2005-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 유지 (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2004-01-01 등재 등재후보 1차 FAIL (등재후보1차) KCI등재후보
    2003-01-01 등재 등재후보학술지 선정 (신규평가) KCI등재후보
    더보기

    학술지 인용정보

    학술지 인용정보
    기준연도 WOS-KCI 통합IF(2년) KCIF(2년) KCIF(3년)
    2016 0.68 0.68 0.68
    KCIF(4년) KCIF(5년) 중심성지수(3년) 즉시성지수
    0.73 0.72 0.798 0.1
    더보기

    이 자료와 함께 이용한 RISS 자료

    나만을 위한 추천자료

    해외이동버튼