Принцип самостоятельности бюджетов в механизме защиты имущественных интересов публично-правовых образований. Татьяна Братко
Чтение книги онлайн.

Читать онлайн книгу Принцип самостоятельности бюджетов в механизме защиты имущественных интересов публично-правовых образований - Татьяна Братко страница 61

СКАЧАТЬ Center: [website]. URL: https://supreme. justia.com/cases/federal/us/413/756/case.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017).

      220

      См.: Walz v. Tax Comm'n of City of New York, 397 U. S. 664 (1970) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: https://supreme. justia.com/cases/federal/us/397/664/case.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017).

      221

      См., в частности: Federal Election Commission v. Akins, 524 U. S. 11 (1998) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: https:// supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/524/11/case.html (дата обращения:

      25.01.2017).

      222

      См.: Flast v. Cohen, 392 U. S. 83 (1968) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/ us/392/83/case.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017).

      223

      См., например, следующие дела, в которых ВС США высказал мнение о возможности налогоплательщика оспорить легитимность федеральных бюджетных расходов: Tilton v. Richardson, 403 U. S. 672 (1971) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: https://supreme.justia.com/ cases/federal/us/403/672/case.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Bowen v. Kendrick, 487 U. S. 589 (1988) [Electronic resource] // Justia U. S. Supreme Court Center: [website]. URL: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/487/589/ case.html (дата обращения: 25.01.2017).

      224

      См., в частности: Brilmayer L. The Jurisprudence of Article III [Electronic resource]: Perspectives on the «Case Or Controversy» Requirement // Harvard Law Review. 1979. Vol. 93, Issue 2. P 297–321. URL: http://www.jstor.org/ stable/1340380 (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Scalia A. The Doctrine of Standing as an Essential Element of the Separation of Powers [Electronic resource] // Suffolk University Law Review. 1983. Vol. 17, Issue 4. P 881–900. URL: http:// suffolklawreview.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/Scalia_17SuffolkULRev881. pdf (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Roberts J. G. Article III Limits on Statutory Standing [Electronic resource] // Duke Law Journal. 1993. Vol. 42, Issue 6. P. 1219–1232. URL: http://scholarship.law.duke.edu/dlj/vol42/iss6/4 (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Kontorovich E. What Standing Is Good for [Electronic resource] // Virginia Law Review. 2007. Vol. 93, Issue 7. P 1663–1727. URL: http://www.jstor.org/ stable/25050393 (дата обращения: 25.01.2017).

      225

      Подробнее об этом см.: Abramowitz A. A Remedy for Every Right [Electronic resource]: What Federal Courts Can Learn from California’s Taxpayer Standing // California Law Review. 2010. Vol. 98, Issue 5. P 1595–1629. UrL: http://www.jstor. org/stable/25799948 (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Sager L. G. Fair Measure [Electronic resource]: The Legal Status of Underenforced Constitutional Norms // Harvard Law Review. 1978. Vol. 91, Issue 6. P. 1212–1264. URL: http://www.jstor. org/stable/1340476 (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Taxpayers’ Suits [Electronic resource]: A Survey and Summary // The Yale Law Journal. 1960. Vol. 69, Issue 5. P 904–905. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/794496 (дата обращения: 25.01.2017).

      226

      Подробнее об этом см., например: Tushnet M. V. The New Law of Standing [Electronic resource]: A Plea for Abandonment // Cornell Law Review. 1977. Vol. 62, Issue 4. P 663–700. URL: http://scholarship.law.cornell.edu/clr/vol62/iss4/1 (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Tushnet M. V. The Sociology of Article III [Electronic resource]: A Response to Professor Brilmayer // Harvard Law Review. 1980. Vol. 93, Issue 8. P 1698–1726. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1340620 (дата обращения:

      25.01.2017); Nichol G. R. Standing on the Constitution [Electronic resource]: The Supreme Court and Valley Forge // North Carolina Law Review. 1983. Vol. 61, Issue 5. P 798–848. URL: http://scholarship.law.unc.edu/nclr/vol61/iss5/2 (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Nichol G. R. Abusing Standing [Electronic resource]: A Comment on Allen v. Wright // University of Pennsylvania Law Review. 1985. Vol. 133, Issue 3. P 635660. URL: http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/pnlr133&start_pa ge=635&collection=journals&id=651 (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Fletcher W. A. The Structure of Standing [Electronic resource] // Yale Law Journal. 1988. Vol. 98, Issue 2. P. 221–292. URL: http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/ ylr98&start_page=221&collection=journals&id=241 (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Bandes S. The Idea of a Case [Electronic resource] // Stanford Law Review. 1990. Vol. 42, Issue 2. P 227–320. URL: http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein. journals/stflr42&start_page=227&collection=journals&id=241 (дата обращения:

      25.01.2017); Sunstein С. R. What’s Standing after Lujan? Of Citizen Suits, Injuries, and Article III [Electronic resource] // Michigan Law Review. 1992. Vol. 91, Issue 2. P 163–236. URL: http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/mlr91&start_ page=163&collection=journals&id=187 (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Nichol G. R. Standing for Privilege [Electronic resource]: The Failure of Injury Analysis // Boston University Law Review. 2002. Vol. 82, Issue 2. P 301–340. UrL: http://heinonline. org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/bulr82&start_page=301&collection=journals& id=313 (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Michaels L. S. Hein v. Freedom From Religion Foundation [Electronic resource]: Sitting This One Out – Denying Taxpayer Standing to Challenge Faith-Based Funding // Harvard Civil Rights – Civil Liberties Law Review. 2008. Vol. 43, Issue 1. P 213–237. URL: http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/ crcl/vol43_1/213-238.pdf (дата обращения: 25.01.2017).

      227

      См., в частности: Actions. Taxpayer’s Standing in Court to Question Expenditures of State Funds [Electronic resource] // Virginia Law Review. 1948. Vol. 34, Issue 3. P 336–337. URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1069159 (дата обращения: 25.01.2017).

      228

      Подробнее об этом см.: Winer L. H., Crimm N. J. God, Schools, And Government Funding [Electronic resource]: First Amendment Conundrums. Farnham: Routledge, 2014. P. 212–219. URL: https://www.routledge.com/God-Schools-and-Government-Funding-First-Amendment-Conundrums/Winer-Crimm/p/book/9781409450313 (дата обращения: 25.01.2017); Zelinsky E. A. Putting State Courts in the Constitutional Driver’s Seat [Electronic resource]: State Taxpayer Standing After Cuno and Winn // Hastings Constitutional Law Quarterly. 2012. Vol. 40, Issue 1. P. 28–35. URL: http://www.hastingsconlawquarterly.org/ archives/V40/Zelinsky_Final_Online.pdf (дата обращения: 25.01.2017).

      229

      См., например: Shaviro D. N. Rethinking Tax Expenditures and Fiscal Language [Electronic resource] // Tax Law Review. 2004. Vol. 57, Issue 2. P 187232. URL: http://heinonline.org/HOL/Page?handle=hein.journals/taxlr57&start_ СКАЧАТЬ