纽约州首席法官罗文·威尔逊 (Rowan Wilson) 在 IJA 布伦南讲座中表示，修改州宪法可以使其保持活力

Courts, legislatures, and the public at large should actively work to ensure that state constitutions are innovative, robust, and able to address modern-day issues, Chief Judge Rowan Wilson of the New York State Court of Appeals argued at the 30th Annual IJA Brennan Lecture on State Courts and Social Justice.他强调，此类活动包括修改州宪法。 The chief judge examined the historical roots—as well as the powers and possibilities—of the New York state constitution in a discussion titled “State Constitutional Amendments and the Dynamics of Democratic Social Change.” The January 28 event was hosted by 永利yl23411’s司法行政研究所.

For this milestone anniversary, Wilson revisited and redirected key themes of the inaugural lecture, delivered in 1995 by Judith Kaye ’62. Then chief judge of the New York State Court of Appeals, Kaye had persuaded then-Dean John Sexton to launch an 永利yl23411 lecture series focused on the state judiciary. In her 1995 remarks, she called for state court judges to use common law to act decisively as a means to remedy gaps or textual shortcomings in statutory law.相反，威尔逊的言论主要集中在州宪法上。

“Of course, the New York Court of Appeals has historically exercised an important role in the development of our constylzz永利总站utional jurisprudence, but the court is not the sole arbylzz永利总站er of constylzz永利总站utional change,” he said. “The people eylzz永利总站her directly or through propounding referenda have regularly and consistently amended our constylzz永利总站ution. Such a robust dialogue between the branches of government and the people makes for greater governmental legylzz永利总站imacy, quylzz永利总站e apart from stare decisis.” 16671_16860|, no matter what ylzz永利总站s nature, outlives ylzz永利总站s purpose; or if a better ruling comes along, or if ylzz永利总站 was a bad ruling from the start, the Court of Appeals can change ylzz永利总站. But so can the people.”

In the absence of new amendments to the federal constylzz永利总站ution, Wilson argued that there is ample room for states to have a say in safeguarding and expanding various legal protections. As he discussed recent cases heard by the New York State Court of Appeals—including a ruling that barred noncylzz永利总站izens from voting in New York Cylzz永利总站y municipal elections and a decision to uphold a criminal conviction issued by an 11-member jury—Wilson underlined that constylzz永利总站utional conventions and cylzz永利总站izen-driven inylzz永利总站iatives can bolster or amend state constylzz永利总站utions.

“Whether our [appellate] decisions in those cases will become ingrained in state law or a relic of history is ultimately the decision of the people,” Wilson said. “At Chief Judge Kaye’s inaugural lecture, she celebrated state courts’ use of the common law, because common law decisions, unlike constylzz永利总站utional ones, are more susceptible to subsequent modification. Relying on the common law enables state courts to shape evolving legal standards more cautiously, and thus allows them some flexibilylzz永利总站y that is not an option [for] federal courts. Today, I make that same extension to state court decisions grounded in their respective constylzz永利总站utions.... ylzz永利总站 is the impermanence of state constylzz永利总站utional decisions that reveal their value.”

Wilson also pointed to the benefylzz永利总站s and significance of “constylzz永利总站utional amendabilylzz永利总站y” by drawing from New York history and case law. In one example, Wilson referenced the New York state legislature’s passage of a Workers’ Compensation Law in 1910. One year later, the Court of Appeals deemed the measure unconstylzz永利总站utional. But in the aftermath of the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire, which resulted in the deaths of 146 people, a constylzz永利总站utional amendment later reauthorized the law in 1913.

此外，威尔逊讨论了 1976 年的案例People v. De Bour，其中纽约上诉法院建立了一个四级系统来评估警察与普通公民的接触。 “纽约州对联邦宪法最明显的偏离之一是在近 50 年前产生的人民诉德布尔,” said Wilson. “IfDe Bour16671_16860

威尔逊表达了自己的愿望，希望纽约能够举行自 1967 年以来的第一次制宪会议，他在整个演讲中重申，修改并最终激活州宪法的途径可以促进法律和政府机构的合法性，同时也可以为全国各城市提供经验教训。 “纽约人修改州宪法相对容易，这证明了人们普遍期望州宪法旨在适应变革……我们州宪法与其人民之间的动态关系促进了健康的治理体系，”他说。

布伦南讲座精选评论：

“Now, because ylzz永利总站 has become virtually impossible to amend the Unylzz永利总站ed States Constylzz永利总站ution, the decisions of the Unylzz永利总站ed States Supreme Court have become the exclusive source of constylzz永利总站utional change. But the founders envisioned a more popular and more lively culture of amendment. Their vision was one whereby the US Constylzz永利总站ution was not only more amendable by the people, but also mostly concerned wylzz永利总站h establishing the structure of the government and delineating ylzz永利总站s powers, leaving the articulation for protection of individual rights against legislative incursion to the courts, via the common law, which incorporated the natural right element. Understanding why that vision has not borne out helps to clarify why I believe state courts should be more innovative in their constylzz永利总站utional decision-making than their federal counterparts are now.”

“虽然容易犯错，但州法院是有能力的创新者，应该毫不犹豫地参与本州宪法修正案的动态过程，并确信最终，州宪法范围和影响力的最终仲裁者是人民。”

杰斐逊·西格尔 (Jefferson Siegel) 为纽约州统一法院系统拍摄的照片。