最高法院周二同意审查一项要求政府效率部（DOGE）在正在进行的诉讼中交出内部通信的规定，特朗普政府称该要求是“侵入性”的，违反了权力分立原则。
The Supreme Court on Tuesday agreed to review a requirement that the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) turn over internal communications in ongoing litigation, which the Trump administration calls an “intrusive” demand that violates the separation of powers.
此前，最高法院曾作出裁决，支持政府在寻求紧急救济时的立场。
The high court previously issued a ruling siding with the administration when it sought emergency relief.
如今，该争议已回到大法官们的常规议程。
Now, the dispute has returned to the justices on their regular docket.
口头辩论可能将于明年年初举行，裁决预计将在夏季作出。
Oral arguments are likely to be held early next year, with a decision expected by summer.
DOGE 在特朗普第二任期早期几个月里主导了联邦政府范围内的裁员和经费削减，引发联邦雇员和补助金接受者的一波诉讼。
DOGE spearheaded job and funding cuts throughout the federal government in the early months of the second Trump term, sparking a wave of litigation from federal employees and grant recipients.
其他团体则因 DOGE 人员访问敏感政府系统而提起诉讼。
Other groups filed lawsuits over DOGE personnel’s access to sensitive government systems.
DOGE 于 7 月 4 日正式关闭运营，但其许多员工随后转至其他机构，担任技术或设计岗位。
DOGE formally shut down operations on July 4, but many of its employees went to different agencies in technology or design roles.
该诉讼的核心是 DOGE 是否符合《信息自由法》（FOIA）中“机构”的定义。
At the center of the lawsuit is whether DOGE qualifies as an “agency” under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) statute.
特朗普通过发布一项行政行动，正式成立了该机构，该行动将现有的美国数字服务（U.S. Digital Service）更名为美国 DOGE 服务（U.S. DOGE Service）。
Trump formally created the group by issuing an executive action that renamed the existing U.S. Digital Service as the U.S. DOGE Service.
在法庭上，司法部表示它不符合该定义。
In court, the Justice Department says it doesn’t qualify.
此案始于华盛顿责任与道德公民（CREW）——一个左翼监督组织——起诉 DOGE，要求其回应 FOIA 请求。
The case at hand began after Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), a left-leaning watchdog, sued DOGE to force it to answer FOIA requests.
为澄清 FOIA 是否适用于 DOGE，华盛顿特区联邦地区法院法官克里斯托弗·库珀要求该机构披露有关其工作的某些行政部门内部通信。
To shed light on whether FOIA applies to DOGE, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper demanded the group disclose certain intra-executive branch communications about its work.
库珀是前总统奥巴马的任命者，现任职于全国首都的联邦审判法庭。
Cooper is an appointee of former President Obama who serves on the federal trial bench in the nation’s capital.
最高法院于 2025 年 6 月在自由派大法官的异议中叫停了该命令，称该要求至少需要被缩小范围。
The Supreme Court halted the order in June 2025, over the dissents of the liberal justices, saying the demand needed to at least be narrowed.
在最新一轮中，司法部长 D.约翰·索尔在法庭文件中写道，他们仅是“略微”这样做。
In the latest round, Solicitor General D. John Sauer wrote in court filings that they only did so “slightly.”
“下级法院的做法也背离了《信息自由法》保护权力分离的宗旨。”
索尔写道。
“The lower courts’ approach also defeats FOIA’s objective of protecting the separation of powers,” Sauer wrote.
“让咨询机构接受侵入性的证据开示，将触发国会试图避免的那些担忧。”
“Subjecting advisory bodies to intrusive discovery triggers the very concerns that Congress sought to avoid.”
但CREW表示，下级法院“完全按照”大法官的指示执行，并驳回了他们在本案中完全阻止证据开示的任何说法。
But CREW said the lower courts followed the justices’ instructions “to the letter” and dismissed any notion that they had completely foreclosed discovery in the case.
“这并不是法院所说的意思。”
该组织的律师在法庭文件中写道。
“That is not what this Court said,” the group’s attorneys wrote in court filings.