為 ‘所謂的’法律挺身而出

Standing Up for ‘so-called’ Law

為 ‘所謂的’法律挺身而出

 

By Martha Minow and Robert Post   FEBRUARY 10, 2017

(來源: The Boston Global.            譯文分享：撫今追昔 2/13/2017)

 

Last Saturday, President Trump tweeted, “The opinion of this so-called judge, which essentially takes law-enforcement away from our country, is ridiculous and will be overturned!” In mocking Judge James L. Robart, the federal district court judge who stayed the president’s executive order banning travel for individuals from seven predominantly Muslim countries, Trump risks making an enemy of the law and the Constitution. He then expressed contempt for the deliberations of the three-member appellate court convened to review Robart’s order, calling the legal argument “disgraceful,” and remarking that a “bad high school student would understand this” — before the appellate panel unanimously left Robart’s order in place.

上星期六，特朗普總統在維特這樣寫到，“這個所謂的法官的意見，本質是脫離我們國家的法製，是謊謬的，將被推翻！” 意在嘲諷法官詹姆斯·羅伯特，一名聯邦地區法院法官宣布暫停執行禁止七個主要穆斯林國家的人進入美國的總統行政命令，特朗普挺而走險要以法律和憲法為敵。接著，他對上級法院審理羅伯特的命令的三位法宮的議決表示蔑視，稱其法律論據“可恥”，並指出“連上高中的壞學生都會理解這一點” - 三位審議法官都沒有對羅伯特的命令提出異議。

Now Trump is attacking anyone who calls him to account — senators, scientists, the civil service, the media, and the Democratic Party, to name a few. His approach divides the world between friends and enemies, vividly reminding us of the political philosophy of notorious theorist Carl Schmitt. Politics, Schmitt said, was an existential struggle for survival that requires us to destroy those who oppose us. It is no surprise, therefore, that Trump tells us that he is in a “running war” with the media, and that Trump’s trusted adviser, Stephen Bannon, instructs the press to “keep its mouth shut and just listen for while.”
現在特朗普攻擊所有要他承擔責任的人，包括參議員，科學家，公務員，媒體和民主黨。他的做法就是將世界分為朋友和敵人，生動地提醒我們關於臭名昭著的卡爾·施密特的政治哲學理論。施密特說，政治是一種求生存的鬥爭，我們必須去摧毀那些反對我們的人。因此不足為怪的是，特朗普告訴我們，他正在與媒體進行“戰爭”，特朗普最信賴的顧問斯蒂芬·班農指示新聞界“要閉嘴，僅僅聽話而已”。

Muslims are the latest enemy on Trump’s hit list. His recent executive order was plainly drafted to appeal to his supporters during the campaign. Because such a shocking proposal would violate sacred American traditions protecting religious freedom and nondiscrimination, he crafted the executive order in the close confines of the White House and refused to permit the relevant federal agencies with legal expertise — Homeland Security, Defense, State, Justice — to vet the order. The evident goal was to maximize the political impact of the order while minimizing the reasonable restraints that a respect for law might impose.      

穆斯林是特朗普要打擊名單上的最新敵人。他最近的行政命令顯然是迎合在競選期間他是如此呼籲而得到的支持者。然而這樣一個令人震驚的建議將違反保護宗教自由和不搞種族歧視這樣神聖的美國傳統，他在白宮內部製定了如此行政命令，拒絕接受具有法律專長的相關聯邦機構 - 國家安全部，國防部，國務院，司法部 - 來共同審查這個指令。很明顯，他的目標是最大限度地行使總統命令的政治影響，同時最大限度地減少因為尊重法律而可能施加的合理權力限製。

The executive order produced pointless confusion and massive heartbreak. It caused untold and needless suffering among the more than 100,000 affected by the administration’s secret revocation of already-granted visas. Although the White House initially announced that only 109 persons had been affected by the order, the administration’s staggeringly inaccurate account of the facts can most charitably be explained by a cruel indifference to the order’s human consequences. The sufferings of Muslims apparently don’t count once they are included on Trump’s growing enemy list.
這個總統行政命令引發出毫無意義的混亂和令人萬分悲傷。在政府秘密撤銷已經批準的簽證因而受影響的10萬多人中間，造成了無法言說和沒有必要的痛苦。雖然白宮最初宣布隻有109人受到該命令的影響，但政府對事實令人吃驚的不準確敘述，最能使人信服地解釋為政府對此命令會給人類帶來殘酷後果而漠不關心。顯然一旦穆斯林被包括在特朗普那還在增長的敵人名單上，他們的苦難可以被忽視。

Trump’s executive order feeds the “clash of civilizations” narrative used by Islamic radicals to recruit those, including disaffected American citizens, who would attack this country. It turns the United States from a shining beacon into a scene of religious and ethnic discrimination. It is no accident that anti-Semitism and reports of hate crimes are on the rise.

特朗普的行政命令向伊斯蘭激進分子提供可以用來招募那些攻擊這個國家的人而使用的“文明衝突”說法，其中包括對政府不滿的美國公民。它使美國從閃亮的燈塔變成宗教和種族歧視的場地。毫無意外現在反猶太主義和仇恨犯罪的報道頻繁而出。

We are deans of respected law schools. We have dedicated our professional lives to the proposition that law overrides violence with reason. Law stands for what we have in common, not merely what divides us. Law respects disagreement; it patiently considers evidence and advocacy; it engages with the views of all. Each person — not just each citizen — is equal before the law. Created in ancient times to terminate endless cycles of vengeance and retribution, law substitutes official, publicly justified sanctions for animosity and enmity.

我們是受人尊敬的法學院的院長。奉獻我們的畢生職責為了一個命題，理性地運用法律來製裁

暴力。法律代表著我們共同的東西，而不是使我們分裂的東西。法律尊重不同觀點; 耐心地考慮證據和合理倡導; 它吸取了所有人的意見。每個人 - 不僅僅是每個公民 - 在法律麵前都是平等的。創建於古時代，用以終止無休止的複仇和報複這樣的惡循環，法律取代官方，公開合理地製裁仇恨和敵意。

This is what is so radically disturbing about Trump’s attack on Judge James L. Robart, the George W. Bush appointee who temporarily suspended the enforcement of the executive order. If Trump believes he can make an enemy of the law and of the Constitution, then he has truly become a foe of the Republic, despite the oath he swore at his inauguration. The craft and professional culture of law is what makes politics possible; it is what keeps politics from spiraling into endless violence. By questioning the legitimacy and authority of judges, Trump seems perilously close to characterizing the law as simply one more enemy to be smashed into submission. At risk are the legal practices and protections that guard our freedom and our safety from the mob violence that destroyed democracies in the 1930s.

小布什總統時期任命的羅伯特宣布暫時停止執行總統行政命令，而特朗普對法官詹姆斯·羅伯特的攻擊使人極端焦慮。如果特朗普相信他能夠成為法律和憲法的敵人，那麽盡管他在就職典禮上宣誓就職，他還是會成為美國的敵人。法律的專業獨立才能使政治成為可能; 才可使政治不成為無止境的暴力鬥爭。質疑法官的合法性和權威，特朗普似乎危險地接近於將法律描述為另一個敵人並要被砸碎。我們的法律實踐處在危險之中，我們要監護我們的自由和我們的安全以免受如1930年代那股摧毀民主國家的暴行。

It is time for all who care about this nation to worry when the nation’s most powerful office is used to intimidate the institutions of law that have maintained American stability and prosperity since the founding of the Republic. Trump’s attack on the “so-called” Judge Robart and his “ridiculous” order exposes just how fragile our democracy is. The President’s own nominee for the Supreme Court, Judge Neil Gorsuch, has called Trump’s attacks on courts “disheartening” and “demoralizing.” We must be vigilant to preserve what makes America precious: the thirst for freedom and fairness, the demands of responsibility and cooperation, the solidarity that somehow makes e pluribus unum. Law is an essential medium of these virtues. If we are to keep the rule of law, it must not be a partisan question; it must not be the concern simply of lawyers. We must all defend it, passionately and whole-heartedly. Without the rule of law, we may have a “so-called” president who has in fact become a tyrant. Fundamentally, this moment is not about Trump. It is about all of us.
現在是所有關心這個國家的人應該憂慮的時候了，因為國家最強大的總統府竟被用來恐嚇從美國成立以來就保持國家穩定和繁榮的法律體製。特朗普對“所謂”法官羅伯特和他的“謊謬”法令的攻擊暴露了我們的民主是多麽脆弱。連總統自已提名的最高法院大法官Neil Gorsuch也表示，特朗普對法院的攻擊令人“傷心”和“沮喪”。我們必須提高警惕，保護美國應有的特征：渴求自由和公平，推行責任與合作，隻有團結起來才能合眾為一 (譯者注：e pluribus unum  拉丁文，合眾為一，是印在美國國徽上的格言之一，出現在國徽的正麵)。法律是這些特征的基石。如果我們要堅持法治，那就與黨派問題無關; 法律不應該僅僅由律師們來關注。我們必須全心全意地捍衛法冶。沒有法治，我們可能會有一個“所謂”的總統而事實上的暴君。從根本上說，這不是針對特朗普的問題，這是影響我們所有人的關鍵時刻。

Martha Minow is the dean and professor of law at Harvard Law School. Robert Post is the dean and professor of law at Yale Law School.

瑪莎·米諾是哈佛法學院院長和法學教授。羅伯特·波特是耶魯法學院的院長和法學教授。

Editor’s Note: At the authors’ request, this piece has been updated since its original print publication.
編者按：根據作者的要求，這篇文章自從出版以後又有所更新。