미국 연방대법원의 헌법해석의 진화와 쟁점

Most Constitutional theories of United States America has been stemmed from the theory of judicial review of the Supreme Court since the case of Mabury v. Madison in 1803, and the theory of Constitutional Law interpretation has conflicted legal-formalism and anti-formalism in American legal history. This article took an account of the evolution and their issues of U.S. Supreme Court's Constitutional interpretation theory following as: First, I assumed the differences between the value-neutral judging of legal-formalism and the value-choice judging of anti-formalism as a fundamental theory of U.S. constitutional interpretation. Second, I had to take into consideration of Originalism's issues of constitutional adjudication of value-neutral orientation which have been evolved an original intent, original meaning, Dworkin's semantic originalsim, and Balkin's living originalism so far. Third, it is covered with what is differences between Originalism and Functionalism as anti-formalism, which defends for judge's choice of value in U.S. Supreme court's Constitutional Adjudication, concerning about the doctrine of separation of power. Lastly, while German constitutional interpretation oriented 'value formalism' as model of constitutional adjudication, has firmly influenced with Korean constitutional culture so far, I have to take into consideration of the approach of constitutional sociology which alludes to escape 'politicization of judiciary' by application to Balkin's 'living originalism' now.