最高法院于周四宣布，将裁决特朗普总统实施的强制拘留政策的合法性。这一政策被列入了法官们即将审理的案件清单中。特朗普政府主张：如果某人被认定非法居留在美国（即使他们已在美国生活多年），政府仍有权对其进行无担保拘留。这一举措大幅扩展了政府的移民执法权力。由于该政策被质疑违反联邦法律，数千起相关诉讼案件随之涌现，给全国各地的法官带来了繁重的工作负担。
The Supreme Court announced on Thursday it will decide the legality of President Trump’s mandatory detention policy, putting one of his banner immigration programs on the justices’ docket for their upcoming term. The Trump administration argues it can detain people without bond if they’re found to be in the country unlawfully, even if they have been living on U.S. soil for years. It’s a significant expansion of the government’s immigration powers. The push has fueled thousands of cases claiming the policy exceeds federal law, creating an avalanche of work for judges across the country, who are racing to keep up.
这场争议将在最高法院的下一任期内得到审理：口头辩论预计将在明年年初进行，最终裁决可能会在夏季公布。在败诉于下级法院后，特朗普政府将这两起案件提交给了最高法院。此前，各巡回法院大多裁定该政策违宪。司法部长D·约翰·索尔在法庭文件中写道：“这一政策正在扰乱移民法律的正常执行秩序。”他还表示：“此外，在这个问题得到解决之前，大量涉及人身保护令（habeas corpus）的诉讼将继续给全国各地的地方法院和美国检察官办公室带来巨大压力。”
The dispute is set to be heard during the Supreme Court’s upcoming term. Oral arguments are expected early next year, with a decision likely by summer. The Trump administration brought two cases to the justices after losing before lower court judges. Circuit courts have mostly ruled against the president. Solicitor General D. John Sauer said it’s “disrupting the orderly administration of immigration law.”“Moreover, the volume of habeas litigation will continue to impose immense burdens on district courts and U.S. Attorney’s Offices throughout the nation until this issue is resolved,” Sauer wrote in court filings.
在以往的政府执政期间，被拘留者有权向移民法官申请释放。然而在特朗普执政期间，拘留人数激增，全国共有超过6.5万人被关押在相关设施中。移民权益倡导者指出：被拘留者中绝大多数（约70%）并未被定罪；其中许多人实际上是合法移民，他们的移民申请因行政积压而尚未得到处理。美国第四巡回上诉法院的最新裁决指出，特朗普政府的这一新政策引发了大量人身保护令申请，形成了“海啸般”的诉讼浪潮。
Under previous administrations, those who were detained had a right to push for their release from detention in front of an immigration judge. Detention rates under Trump have skyrocketed, with more than 65,000 people held in facilities across the country. Advocates for immigrants have noted that that the vast majority of those detained migrants — roughly 70 percent — have no criminal convictions. Many are also legal immigrants, including those who have active immigration petitions that have not yet been acted on due to administrative backlogs. In the most recent ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 4th Circuit, the court noted the “tsunami” of habeas petitions spurred by the administration's new interpretation.
“数百家联邦地区法院审议了我们今天审理的问题。绝大多数——超过五百家——驳回了政府的新解释，并在两万多起个案中支持请愿人，”上诉法院写道。但他们认定，国会在通过《非法移民改革和移民责任法案》（IIRIRA）时，并未授权该部门大规模拘留每一名移民。“如果我们同意政府的解释，就必须得出结论：三十年前国会通过IIRIRA时，意在指令美国历史上规模最大的单次大规模拘留，”他们写道。
“Hundreds of federal district courts have considered the question we consider today. The overwhelming majority—over five hundred—rejected the Government’s new construction and sided with the petitioners in over twenty thousand individual cases,” the appeals court wrote. But they determined Congress did not give the department authority to broadly detain every migrant in passing the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act (IIRIA). “If we were to agree with the Government’s construction, we would need to conclude that, in passing IIRIRA thirty years ago, Congress intended to direct the single largest mass detention of human beings in our nation’s history,” they wrote.