On The Legislators’ Original Intention In The Legal Interpretation

This paper focuses on the criticism of the original intention of the legal interpretation,and the purpose of this paper is to illustrate a problem,that is why it is improper to blindly follow the legislative intent.Based on the theoretical study of Originalism in American constitutional interpretation,the intent of legislators to explain various variants of summary and comb,draw on is also applicable to the interpretation of the law in the legislative intent of the nutrition,analysis of related problems in the legal interpretation by legislators intent exists.The three part of the basic theory of the object of study,the legislators intended to explain the definition,basic ideas,mainly from two aspects of technical and normative level,gradually demonstrate legislative intention is an objective and existing form,legislators who wish how to converge into the unified mechanism of intent and legislative intent interpretation why does not have the legitimacy problem.In a comprehensive and detailed analysis on why the legal interpretation should not blindly follow the legislative intent,through in-depth analysis of Dworkin’s legal theory hypothesis,finally discusses further on the road of legal interpretation in other feasibility.The legislators intended technical criticism,through criticizing the intent of individual legislators and the collective intent of the legislators,focusing on whether lawmakers intent itself and lawmakers intent together the possibility and way,the author acknowledged the lawmakers’ intention is the objective existence,but the author acknowledges lawmakers intent the real and not originalists generally understood that:that the legislators intent is factual,is only a guide,explain is the requirement of democracy,is the most objective and impartial legal interpretation methods with no personal value.We must admit the legislators intended by a moral reasoning to prove,through the correct democratic theory to construct can be obtained,then there is a certain value with lawmakers intent of.At the same time,we find that the original intention of the fictitious legislator is also true,and the legitimacy of the method based on the original intention of the fictitious legislator is questionable.To criticize the legislators intended normative level,the legitimacy of the legislators intended starting,starting from the real democratic theory analysis,argumentation of "democratic theory" as the basis of the theory of original intention of legislators and the legitimacy of criticism.At the same time through aesthetic hypothesis further what the law is:the law is not the ruling class oppression of another class of tools,up from the legal nature is political,law is associated with the use of public power.Through the analysis of the legal concept,the concept of constitutionalism and put forward the laws of Dworkin hypothesis,namely in the field of law,the law is to guarantee equality,through the exercise of public power is limited to the pursuit of fairness and justice,legal interpretation of the law is to realize the activity as a function that,rather than to avoid interpretation in the interpretation of the law when adding a personal value judgment and find the most objective interpretation method called,to blindly follow the legislative intent.Based on the hypothesis of legal argument and the deconstruction of the theory of original intention of the legislators,the author tries to abstract intention and specific intent to distinguish,to explore alternative method of abstract sense of the intention of the legislators intended,which further emphasizes the rule of law is not a personal rule of all people,not dead legislators rule generation later,the law is a product of cooperation of different generations of people,we need to refer to the past the original intent of the legislators,but never explain the intention of legislation has a monopoly.Finally,through the analysis to further explore the legal interpretation of the third road,this is a new interpretation method is superior to the original path of legislators,in this way,the legal interpretation in law under the hypothesis to use value judgment,at the same time that the interpretation conclusion is objective,the judgment of value not explain the personal subjective judgment of value added,but not explain individual moral evaluation,but when the legal interpreter in the face of the law in a law to treat the legal hypothesis.