外籍配偶家庭團聚權爭議分析──臺美司法案例為比較

Analysis of Disputes over Rights to Family Reunion for Foreign Spouses: Judicial Cases in Taiwan and the United States for Comparison

當今各國外籍配偶申請婚姻移民，因為不是國民，其家庭團聚權因各國移民政策、國家安全與利益考量而有法規之限制。外籍配偶爭取一國憲法保障人民基本權之「家庭團聚權」，自然是現代社會中非常重要之事情。然而，全球一致性之立法現象，只有「真結婚」之家庭，才能享有「團聚權」。在這篇文章，作者以發生在臺灣與美國的兩起司法案件為例，首先檢視兩國規範婚姻移民者的法規及其解釋，整理出兩方證詞及法院調查判斷的重點。單元「反思與比較」比較兩案例之法院見解及當事人救濟途徑。研究後發現，兩起案件有共通之處──即兩地法院所援引的法條具有文義解釋之模糊性。近年來國際間人民往來頻繁，會有愈多這類涉及外籍配偶的爭議案件浮出檯面，本文研究結果期能提供法院審理這類案件時的省思。

Foreign spouses in various countries often experience a lengthy process of application for marriage immigration. Because they are not nationals, their family reunion rights are restricted by laws and regulations due to immigration policies, national security and interest considerations. Naturally, it is a very important thing in modern society for foreign spouses to fight for the ''right to family reunion'' as one basic right in a country's constitution. However, it is a universal phenomenon in legislature that only the families with ''true marriages'' are entitled to the ''right to reunion''. In this article, the author takes two judicial cases in Taiwan and the United States as examples. She first examines the regulations and statutory interpretations governing marriage immigrants in each case, sorts out the testimonies of the two parties, and clarifies the court's investigation and judgment on the truthfulness of the marriages. The ''Reflection and Comparison'' unit compares the court opinions and the parties' remedies in the two cases. It was discovered that the two cases have something in common--that is, the legal provisions cited by the courts of the two places have ambiguities in interpretation. In terms of more frequent international exchanges in the recent years, it is expected that more and more disputed cases involving foreign spouses will surface. The results of this study can provide courts with reflections when trying such cases.