在法庭审理前联邦调查局局长詹姆斯·科米是否犯罪之前，必须先裁定司法部提起的指控是否属于国会要求在诉讼时效届满前提出的那类指控。
Before a court considers whether former FBI Director James Comey committed a crime, it must decide whether the Justice Department brought the kind of charge Congress required before the statute of limitations expired.
这一答案在任何联邦起诉中都至关重要。在本案中更是如此，因为周一披露的案件无法与唐纳德·特朗普总统长期以来针对科米的公开攻击割裂开来。
The answer would matter in any federal prosecution. It matters even more here because the case revealed Monday cannot be separated from President Donald Trump’s lengthy public campaign against Comey.
自2017年解除科米联邦调查局局长职务以来，特朗普多次公开称其腐败，并要求对其提起诉讼。这绝非私下发泄不满。特朗普在网上以书面形式表达了自己的意愿。去年9月，他施压时任司法部长帕姆·邦迪追究科米及其他被视为敌人者的责任。“他们全都罪大恶极，”他写道，并补充道：“必须立即伸张正义！！！”数日后，科米被起诉。
Since firing Comey as FBI director in 2017, Trump has repeatedly called him corrupt and demanded that he be prosecuted. This was no private frustration. Trump put his wishes in writing online. He pressed then-Attorney General Pam Bondi to pursue Comey and other perceived enemies last September. “They’re all guilty as hell,” he wrote, adding that “JUSTICE MUST BE SERVED, NOW!!!”Days later, Comey was indicted.
第一起起诉涉及科米的国会证词，因获取起诉书的检察官系非法任命而被驳回。第二起基于科米“86 47”贝壳照片的案件仍在审理中。
That first prosecution, involving Comey’s congressional testimony, was dismissed because the prosecutor who obtained the indictment had been unlawfully appointed. A second case, based on Comey’s “86 47” seashell photograph, remains pending.
最新案件可追溯至2016年10月。检方指控科米指使他人向记者提供国防机密信息，内容关乎一项秘密法院命令，该命令要求雅虎扫描邮件，寻找可能与外国恐怖组织有关的信息。科米否认有任何不当行为，其律师称此事此前已被调查两次，均未提起指控。
The latest case dates to October 2016. Prosecutors allege that Comey directed someone to provide a reporter with national defense information about a secret court order requiring Yahoo to scan emails for messages potentially connected to a foreign terrorist organization. Comey denies wrongdoing, and his lawyers say the matter was previously investigated twice without charges being brought.
10月5日，恰逢涉嫌行为发生十周年之际，司法部律师提交了一份秘密刑事指控书。“刑事指控书”是由检察官签署的正式指控。起诉书包含类似指控，但有一项关键区别：大陪审团已听取政府陈述，并认定存在合理根据从而提起指控。
On Oct. 5, exactly a decade after the alleged conduct, Justice Department lawyers filed a criminal information under seal. A “criminal information” is a formal accusation signed by a prosecutor. An indictment contains similar allegations but with one crucial addition: A grand jury has heard the government’s presentation and agreed that probable cause exists to bring the charge.
信息在适当情况下是合法的。当被告打算认罪并正式放弃起诉书权利时，通常会使用信息。科米没有放弃该权利，司法部似乎也没有声称仅凭信息就能将他送上审判席。政府的较窄立场是，提交信息使案件得以继续，让检察官日后可以自由获得起诉书。
Informations are legitimate in the right circumstances. They are commonly used when defendants intend to plead guilty and formally waive their right to an indictment. Comey has not waived that right, and the Justice Department does not appear to claim that it could take him to trial on the information alone. The government’s narrower position is that filing the information kept the case alive, leaving prosecutors free to obtain an indictment later.
根据普通联邦诉讼时效法，这一论点并不特别奇怪。一般规则给予检察官五年时间来提起大多数联邦指控。它规定，如果“发现起诉书”或“提起信息”，政府即视为及时行动。按照这一措辞，法院曾允许检察官在截止日期前提交信息，之后再获得起诉书，即使没有被告放弃权利。但普通的五年诉讼时效无法挽救此案。
Under the ordinary federal statute of limitations, that argument is not especially strange. The general rule gives prosecutors five years to bring most federal charges. It says the government acts in time if an “indictment is found” or an “information is instituted.”Applying that language, courts have allowed prosecutors to file an information before the deadline and obtain an indictment afterward, even without a defendant’s waiver. But the ordinary five-year statute cannot save this case.
为了就据称发生在2016年的行为起诉科米，司法部依赖一项特别条款，该条款赋予政府10年时间来起诉某些国防犯罪。
To prosecute Comey over conduct alleged to have occurred in 2016, the Justice Department is relying on a special provision giving the government 10 years to charge certain national defense offenses.
该条款的措辞不同。它规定，“起诉书”必须在10年内提起。它没有提及信息。
That provision is worded differently. It says that an “indictment” has to be brought within 10 years. It does not mention an information.
正是在此，司法部的理论变得难以辩护。允许检察官通过提交信息来停止时效的法律只给予他们五年时间。本质上，司法部试图从第一部法律中获取10年，从第二部法律中获取更简便的提交方式——但国会从未将两者合并。
That is where the Justice Department’s theory becomes difficult to defend. The law allowing prosecutors to stop the clock with an information gives them only five years. Essentially, the DOJ is trying to take the 10 years from the first law and the easier filing method from the second — but Congress never combined the two.
国会显然了解起诉书与简易起诉书之间的区别，因为这两个词都出现在一般法规中。然而，当立法者赋予检察官两倍的时间来起诉这一特定类别的案件时，法规中只使用了其中一个词。如果国会意图让这两种起诉文件在特别条款下具有相同效力，它就不会漏掉其中一个。
Congress clearly understood the difference between an indictment and an information, because both words are used in the general statute. Yet when lawmakers granted prosecutors twice as long to bring this particular category of cases, the statute used only one. If Congress intended both charging documents to have the same effect under the special provision, it wouldn’t have omitted one.
政府表示，提交简易起诉书以保全起诉是广泛认可的联邦做法。一些上诉法院的判决允许完全如此。但这些案件通常解释的是普通时效法规，即明确包含两种起诉文件的那部法规。它们并未裁定检察官能否在另一条款下使用简易起诉书，而该条款中国会仅提及了起诉书。
The government says filing an information to preserve a prosecution is widely recognized federal practice. Some appellate decisions permit exactly that. But those cases generally interpret the ordinary limitations statute, the one that expressly includes both charging documents. They do not settle whether prosecutors can use an information under a different provision in which Congress referred only to an indictment.
司法部可能会辩称，特别法律仅改变了可用的年限，其余一般时效框架保持不变。科米在其驳回起诉的动议中持的立场是，特别条款提供了其自身的指示：起诉书必须在10年内提交。法规并未说检察官可以在截止日期前提交他们准备好的任何起诉文件，然后再稍后获得起诉书。
The Justice Department is likely to argue that the special law merely changes the number of years available, leaving the rest of the general limitations framework intact. Comey’s position in his motion to dismiss is that the special provision supplies its own instruction: An indictment must come within 10 years. The statute does not say that prosecutors may file whatever charging paper they have ready at the deadline and obtain the indictment later.
这听起来可能像是法律上的吹毛求疵，但很重要。时效法规是国会关于政府应有多长时间将某人置于刑事危险之中的判断。它是管辖起诉的法律的一部分，而非边缘的行政琐碎事项。
This may sound like legal hair-splitting, but it’s important. A statute of limitations is Congress’ judgment about how long the government should have to place someone in criminal jeopardy. It is part of the law governing prosecution, not administrative clutter around the edges.
这些时效限制存在的原因是，证据会变得陈旧，证人会消失，记忆也会变得不可靠。它们也反映了一个基本原则：拥有庞大调查资源的联邦政府，最终必须决定是否有案可诉。国会为这些罪行给予了检察官长达10年的宽裕期限。
These limits exist because evidence grows stale, witnesses disappear, and memories become less reliable. They also reflect a basic principle: The federal government, with its enormous investigative resources, eventually must decide whether it has a case. Congress gave prosecutors a generous period of 10 years for these offenses.
值得注意的是，这一指控并非在最后一刻突然出现。据科米的律师称，该披露在2017年和2019年均已接受审查，但未提起刑事案件。司法部有多年时间审查证据，如果愿意，可以将此事提交给大陪审团。
It’s also noteworthy that this allegation did not suddenly appear at the last minute. According to Comey’s lawyers, the disclosure was examined in 2017 and again in 2019 without a criminal case being filed. The Justice Department had years to review the evidence and, if it wished, present the matter to a grand jury.
联邦大陪审团传统上偏向检方：没有辩护方在场，政府掌控证据，标准也仅为合理根据。但这种优势部分取决于信任，而特朗普的司法部反复追究总统公开要求起诉的人，已经严重透支了这种信任。
Federal grand juries traditionally favor prosecutors: No defense is present, the government controls the evidence, and the standard is only probable cause. But that advantage depends partly on trust, and Trump’s Justice Department has squandered a lot by repeatedly pursuing people the president has publicly demanded be charged.
这使得此处缺失的起诉书更具意义。起诉书信息甚至绕过了这种有限的外部制衡，允许检方在总统宣布他想要的结果后提交指控。
That makes the missing indictment here more significant. An information bypasses even this modest outside check, allowing prosecutors to file an accusation when the president has announced the outcome he wants.
政府有10年时间却错过了期限。当总统要求起诉时，规则应当被更严格地执行，而不是更宽松地执行。
The government had 10 years and missed its deadline. When a president demands a prosecution, the rules should be enforced more strictly, not less.