美国行政法学界长期存在着关于行政规则司法审查基准的论争,特别是随着行政领域涉及到更多的科学技术性事项之时。法官应如何对行政规则进行审查,是实体审还是程序审,意见并不一致。本文对此进行了梳理,并认为绝对界分实体审与程序审是难以做到的。从其发展史来看,程序与实体交织在一起,法官面对行政规则时也会有所为、有所不为。从严审查基准的修正将更加体现以上的观点,这对于建立中国“抽象行政行为”司法审查的基准具有借鉴意义。 There is a longstanding debate in the American administrative law community about the benchmarks for judicial review of administrative rules, especially as administrative areas involve more scientific and technical issues. How the judge should review the administrative rules is substantive or procedural review, the views are not the same. This article sorts out this and believes that it is difficult to do the substantive examination and procedural examination of the absolute division. Judging from the history of its development, procedures and entities are intertwined. Judges will also make a difference if they face the administrative rules. The revision of the strict examination basis will more reflect the above viewpoints, which is of reference significance for establishing the benchmark for the judicial review of China’s “abstract administrative act.”