-
(单词翻译:双击或拖选)
AUDIE CORNISH, HOST:
President Trump1's pick for the U.S. Supreme2 Court goes before the Senate Judiciary Committee for his confirmation3 hearing next week. For more than 10 years as a federal appeals court judge, Neil Gorsuch has been writing judicial4 opinions - some in the majority, some in the dissent5, all opinions that strongly hint at what kind of justice he would be. NPR legal affairs correspondent Nina Totenberg takes a closer look at the judge's legal views.
NINA TOTENBERG, BYLINE6: From the get-go, Donald Trump made clear he would nominate someone to the Supreme Court in the mold of Justice Antonin Scalia, the conservative justice whose seat has remained vacant since his sudden death more than a year ago. Those who have read Judge Gorsuch's opinions expect him to fulfill7 that billing. Here's Richard Hasen, professor of law and political science at the University of California, Irvine.
RICHARD HASEN: On issues like abortion8 and affirmative action and gun rights and states' rights, we can expect him overall to be a reliable conservative vote and someone who's going to forcefully and eloquently9 put forward conservative positions on the court.
TOTENBERG: Not that Gorsuch has ruled on all of these issues - he has not. But the legal road signs are there, and indeed they are among the reasons he was picked. Gorsuch, for instance, has never actually ruled directly on an abortion case, but he has ruled on questions involving contraception and public funding for Planned Parenthood, funding unrelated to abortion. On this question, he was in dissent, ruling for a state governor's power to cut off federal funding for women's health services provided by Planned Parenthood.
One of his most controversial opinions involve the Hobby Lobby chain of craft stores which employs 13,000 workers, most of them women. The company refused to comply with the federal law requiring for-profit corporations to provide health insurance plans that cover birth control. Gorsuch, in a majority of the appeals court, ruled that the corporation had a religious right not to provide birth control coverage10. A sharply divided U.S. Supreme Court would later agree, ruling for the first time that certain for-profit corporations have religious rights.
What makes this case particularly interesting is a concurring11 opinion that Gorsuch wrote about the corporate12 owners' rights. All of us face the problem of complicity, he wrote. All must answer to what degree we are willing to be involved in the wrongdoing of others. Here, he noted13, the owners believe that for their company providing insurance that includes coverage for birth control drugs or devices violates their faith.
In many ways, he continued, this case is a tale of two statutes14. One, the Affordable15 Care Act, compels the owners to provide such inclusive health coverage. The other, the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, says they need not. And the tiebreaker, Gorsuch said, is the religious protection law because it is a, quote, "super-statute" that trumps16 others except in special circumstances.
CAROLINE FREDRICKSON: What does that mean, and how far does that go?
TOTENBERG: Caroline Fredrickson is president of the liberal American Constitution Society.
FREDRICKSON: To what extent do people with religious beliefs - do they have to follow the law if they believe it violates their conscience? What is the outer limit of that?
TOTENBERG: What if, for example, a hotel or restaurant owner has a religious belief that bars serving African-Americans or non-Christians or gay people? Indeed there are a variety of such legal clashes working their way up to the Supreme Court right now. Melissa Hart, director of the Colorado University Constitutional Law Center, is a Gorsuch admirer, but...
MELISSA HART: I think it's also reasonable for those who support marriage equality to be concerned.
TOTENBERG: But Mark Rienzi of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty says that in some ways, that is Congress' command in the law it passed overwhelmingly in 1993.
MARK RIENZI: It says that the baseline rule in America will be that we respect religious diversity. And for the most part, we're not going to force people to violate their religious beliefs unless we have a really good reason to.
TOTENBERG: He says that the notion of wrongful complicity is more important than the rights of employees to have health insurance even though for most women of child-bearing age, contraception is their largest regular health expense.
Other Gorsuch decisions relating to religion will undoubtedly17 come up in next week's confirmation hearings - among them, a vigorous dissenting18 opinion concerning a plan by the Utah Highway Patrol Association to erect19 a series of 12-foot crosses along the roadside on public land as a memorial to fallen troopers. Judge Gorsuch's colleagues on the appeals court ruled that the crosses had to go because a reasonable observer would take them as a sign of the state's endorsement20 of Christianity. The Supreme Court declined review, leaving in place the decision forbidding the crosses.
Although Gorsuch has not written directly about abortion, he did write a book called "The Future Of Assisted Suicide And Euthanasia," terminology21 that is offensive to advocates of so-called death-with-dignity laws. In the book, he writes that human life is fundamentally and inherently valuable, and the intentional22 taking of human life by private persons is always wrong. But he describes the court's decisions on abortion in a straightforward23 way without adding almost anything in the way of a personal opinion.
The book, academic in tone but lucid24 in presentation, seems to conclude that there is no necessary connection between the right to abortion and a right to assisted suicide. It does, however, quite clearly subscribe25 to the notion adopted in most state laws that individuals have the right to hasten their own deaths by refusing nutrition, water or medical treatment. Nina Totenberg, NPR News, Washington.
(SOUNDBITE OF ODDISEE SONG, "AFTER THOUGHTS")
1 trump | |
n.王牌,法宝;v.打出王牌,吹喇叭 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
2 supreme | |
adj.极度的,最重要的;至高的,最高的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
3 confirmation | |
n.证实,确认,批准 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
4 judicial | |
adj.司法的,法庭的,审判的,明断的,公正的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
5 dissent | |
n./v.不同意,持异议 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
6 byline | |
n.署名;v.署名 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
7 fulfill | |
vt.履行,实现,完成;满足,使满意 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
8 abortion | |
n.流产,堕胎 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
9 eloquently | |
adv. 雄辩地(有口才地, 富于表情地) | |
参考例句: |
|
|
10 coverage | |
n.报导,保险范围,保险额,范围,覆盖 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
11 concurring | |
同时发生的,并发的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
12 corporate | |
adj.共同的,全体的;公司的,企业的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
13 noted | |
adj.著名的,知名的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
14 statutes | |
成文法( statute的名词复数 ); 法令; 法规; 章程 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
15 affordable | |
adj.支付得起的,不太昂贵的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
16 trumps | |
abbr.trumpets 喇叭;小号;喇叭形状的东西;喇叭筒v.(牌戏)出王牌赢(一牌或一墩)( trump的过去式 );吹号公告,吹号庆祝;吹喇叭;捏造 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
17 undoubtedly | |
adv.确实地,无疑地 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
18 dissenting | |
adj.不同意的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
19 erect | |
n./v.树立,建立,使竖立;adj.直立的,垂直的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
20 endorsement | |
n.背书;赞成,认可,担保;签(注),批注 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
21 terminology | |
n.术语;专有名词 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
22 intentional | |
adj.故意的,有意(识)的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
23 straightforward | |
adj.正直的,坦率的;易懂的,简单的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
24 lucid | |
adj.明白易懂的,清晰的,头脑清楚的 | |
参考例句: |
|
|
25 subscribe | |
vi.(to)订阅,订购;同意;vt.捐助,赞助 | |
参考例句: |
|
|