“斯科特诉桑福德案”与“布朗诉托皮卡教育委员会案”是美国宪政史上著名的种族判例。得到旁征博引、无懈可击的“斯科特案”判决,未能为“布朗案”所遵循。而事实上,“布朗案”的司法推理同样入情入理,判决结论“水到渠成”。那么,藏匿于这种宪法解读背后的可能的因素或缘由是什么,司法解读过程与案件的背景、相关的制度、理念与文化有着怎样的关联,所有这些成为本文的旨趣所在。 “Scott v. Sanford” and “Brown v. Topeka Board of Education” are well-known racial precedents in the history of constitutionalism in the United States. Obtained quotations, impeccable “Scott case” decision, failed to follow the “Brown case”. In fact, “Brown case ” judicial reasoning the same fate, the verdict conclusion . So what are the possible factors or reasons behind the constitutional interpretation? What is the relationship between the process of judicial interpretation and the background of the case, the related systems, ideas and culture, all of which are the objects of this article.