华盛顿——周四，美国最高法院同意审查特朗普政府的一项政策：该政策禁止为移民举行保释听证会，而此时政府正在全面加强移民管控措施。
MICHAEL KUNZELMAN WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Thursday agreed to review a Trump administration policy denying bond hearings for immigrants as the government carries out a sweeping immigration crackdown.
最高法院将审议以下问题：那些长期居住在美国的移民是否有权获得听证会，以确定他们在质疑被驱逐出境的合法性期间是否应被继续拘留。
The justices will consider whether immigrants who have been living in the U.S. have a right to a hearing to determine if they should remain detained while challenging their possible deportation.
来自11个联邦巡回法院中的9个法院的上诉法官均认为，未经保释听证会就拘留移民的行为违反了联邦法律。
Appeals court judges from nine of 11 federal circuits have concluded that detaining immigrants without a bond hearing violates federal law.
这些裁决与第5巡回法院和第8巡回法院的判决相矛盾——后两者认为，被指控非法入境并滞留在美国的移民必须在他们的驱逐案件审理期间被继续拘留。
Those decisions conflict with rulings by the 5th and 8th circuits, which held that immigrants accused of illegally entering and remaining in the U.S. must be detained while their deportation cases are pending.
唐纳德·特朗普政府的律师们表示，这些不同法院之间的分歧正在“扰乱移民法律的正常执行”。他们称，全国各地的法院收到了成千上万份由移民提交的申诉书，这些申诉书质疑政府的法律解释。
Attorneys from President Donald Trump’s administration argue the circuits’ split is “disrupting the orderly administration of immigration law.”They say the nation’s courts have been inundated with thousands of petitions filed by immigrants challenging the government’s legal interpretation.
政府的律师们在文件中写道：“目前的情况是：对于那些未经合法入境而被捕的外国人，某些法院会强制将其拘留，而另一些法院则允许他们举行保释听证会并最终将其释放。”
“The result is an unworkable patchwork of inconsistent immigration enforcement, where aliens present without admission are subject to mandatory detention in some circuits but are entitled to bond hearings and often released in others,” administration lawyers wrote.
这些原告的代理机构是美国公民自由联盟（ACLU）。该组织指出，已有数百名地方法院法官支持大多数巡回法院的裁决，拒绝接受政府对新法规的解读。原告的律师们认为，特朗普政府试图拒绝为在美国任何地方被捕的移民提供保释听证会的机会——无论这些移民在美国居住了多久；而这一限制措施本应仅适用于在边境被拦截的非公民。
The plaintiffs are immigrants represented by the American Civil Liberties Union, which says hundreds of district court judges have joined most circuits in rejecting the administration’s new reading of the statutes. Plaintiffs’ lawyers say the administration is trying to deny bond hearings for immigrants apprehended anywhere in the U.S. — no matter how long they’ve lived here — rather than limiting the restriction to noncitizens stopped at the border.
美国公民自由联盟的律师们进一步指出：“政府的这一新解释可能会影响数百万非公民的权益。”
“Millions of noncitizens could be affected by the government’s new interpretation,” ACLU attorneys wrote.
特朗普政府表示，其新的强制拘留政策符合1996年颁布的移民法规定。这一政策的变化与以往政府的做法不同——以往政府通常允许那些在边境以外被捕且没有犯罪记录的非公民申请保释听证。
The Trump administration says its new mandatory detention policy is legal under a 1996 immigration law. The policy change departs from the practices of prior administrations, which typically allowed most noncitizens without criminal records to request a bond hearing if they were arrested away from the border.