민주 헌정과 정당성 관리 - 위헌법률심사의 한미 비교 -

The aim of this article is to compare the system of judicial review between Korea and USA. The author depends upon a theoretical framework of ‘the management of legitimacy’, because judicial review is the main instrument by which the liberal democracy in certain type(constitutional democracy) manages its legitimacy. In spite of the similarities at glance, the judicial reviews in two countries show interesting differences and contrasts. For example, while the judicial review in USA has developed very much sophisticated screening system, its counterpart in Korea is still in the ordinary citizen's reach. The author tries to compare two countries' system of judicial review in the perspectives like institutional framework in the government, how to select justices, the process and standards of judicial review, the way of final decision-making, and the way of justification and judicial philosophy building. The most important academic picture this article makes is to explain the differences and contrasts from the viewpoints of national politics in those two countries. The author introduces 'the Dualist Democracy' of Bruce Ackerman for USA and 'the Politics of Vortex' of Gregory Handerson for Korea.