PBS高端访谈:特朗普攻击司法正当性是否过火了?

 　　JUDY WOODRUFF: And now to a different court question, and that is the mounting controversy¹ over President Trump²'s attacks on the judiciary. We have just referred to them.

　　For that, we turn to two former judges. Paul Cassell teaches at the University of Utah College of Law. He served as a federal judge for five years in Utah's district court. And Rebecca Kourlis is a former justice of the Colorado Supreme³ Court. She now runs the Institute for the Advancement⁴ of the American Legal System at the University of Denver.

　　And we welcome both of you to the program.

　　And, of course, I'm talking to you, Professor Cassell and Justice Kourlis, just as we have learned about what the circuit court in California has ruled, and that is denying the administration's appeal.

　　But let me turn to you first, Justice Kourlis. What is your reaction to what President Trump has been saying in recent days about this circuit court in California?

　　REBECCA KOURLIS, Former Colorado Supreme Court Justice: Good evening, Judy, and thanks for the opportunity to comment on this.

　　My concern is not so much the disagreement with the outcome, but rather the attack on sort of the legitimacy⁵ of the process. And that risks further polarity, further critique of the judiciary as a political branch of government, which it is not, cannot be, was never intended to be.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF: So, an attack on the legal system, is what you're saying. And you're saying it's inappropriate, it's over the line? How would you characterize it?

　　REBECCA KOURLIS: Well, I don't want to sort of join in the epithet-tossing contest that we seem to be in nationally at present.

　　But I am a longtime former judge, justice. I now study the court in the context of IAALS, the institute at which I work. And our whole focus is on trying to protect the independence and impartiality⁶ of the judiciary, which is not to say that I'm an apologist for judges. Judges make mistakes. Judges can approach cases in a biased⁷ way.

　　There are some judges who are activists⁹. But the point is that the process itself is what we count on, and we agree as a society that we will trust the ultimate outcome from that process. There are appeals. There are ways to approach things, but ultimately it's about the balance of powers and the legitimacy of the courts.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF: Professor Cassell, how do you see it, what the president has been saying about the court, very critical remarks?

　　PAUL CASSELL, University of Utah College of Law: Well, I think he's been very critical of the courts, but then again, the court has been striking down or at least staying one of the signature pieces of his campaign, the immigration reform.

　　And we have a long tradition of three co-equal branches of government, co-equal branches of government that have often felt free to criticize what the others are doing. You can go all the way back the Abraham Lincoln, who very famously even refused to follow some of the edicts from the U.S. Supreme Court.

　　So I see the dialogue as in some ways being healthy, although I would hope that the discourse¹⁰ could be elevated at least above some of the things that have recently been said.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF: Justice Kourlis, why isn't it just healthy dialogue? It does go back. We think about what other presidents have said and done about the court.

　　REBECCA KOURLIS: So, here's sort of the bottom line for me, Judy.

　　It's not OK to criticize a judge as illegitimate or activist⁸ just because you disagree with the outcome. It's fine to say, I think that's the wrong ruling, I disagree with the basis upon which the ruling is issued. But to sort of claim that the judge has no right to issue that ruling, that to me crosses the line.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF: And Professor Kourlis, when President Trump called Judge Robart a so-called judge, and then he went on to talk about — I think he used the word disgraceful the way the judges conducted themselves or some of the judges conducted themselves at the appellate hearing on Tuesday of this week, is that not stepping over the line?

　　Is that calling into question the very role that judges play?

　　REBECCA KOURLIS: It is to me.

　　特朗普攻击司法正当性是否过火了?

　　JUDY WOODRUFF: I'm sorry. I meant that for Professor Cassell.

　　PAUL CASSELL: I think he's stepping over a line of decorum, but I'm not sure that he's stepping over some line that invalidates the separation of powers.

　　President Trump has made it one of his signature I guess style points, you could say, that he's going to be very plainspoken. And so it's not surprising to find he's using strong language to criticize the judges. I wouldn't be using that same language.

　　I think it's a violation¹¹ of our rules of civility, but one of the things that President Trump has indicated is that he's going to press some of those boundaries and he's going to use these forms of communication like Twitter that probably prevents some of the nuance¹² or maybe even some of the elegance¹³ that we have seen from previous presidents.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF: So, Justice Kourlis, what about that? It can be argued that this president is taking advantage of new methods of communication, including Twitter.

　　REBECCA KOURLIS: I'm OK with that, actually, and I'm OK with plain talk and an effort to pierce through some of the complexities¹⁴ of the legal system, because I certainly don't think it's OK to hide behind that.

　　But my point fundamentally is that judges have a role. Their role is to determine the facts in front of them at the trial court level, apply the law, rule, and then the parties can appeal it as far up the process as possible.

　　If the whole process is perceived to be political, if judges are perceived to rule on the basis of who appointed them or what political party they have, then impartiality goes out the window. So people in positions of power, people in leadership positions, I hold to a higher standard of acknowledging the balance of powers, the role of each branch of government.

　　And, by the way, I would apply this evenhandedly. I don't think it's OK to call President Trump a so-called president. There's a legitimacy of process that we all honor and that's part of democracy.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF: What about the point she's making, Professor Cassell?

　　PAUL CASSELL: Well, President Trump I think has recognized legitimacy of the process. He's appealed to the Ninth Circuit, and I'm assuming he's going to ask the Justice Department to appeal to the Supreme Court now to have the decision overturned.

　　But I think it's unfair to take certain labels off the table as inappropriate. There is a healthy debate in this country about whether our judiciary and particularly our federal judiciary is too activist, that is, it is making laws, rather than applying laws.

　　And you can have that debate in the dry language of law professors or you can have it in the more robust¹⁵ language of Twitter feeds and plainspoken talk. And I think President Trump is trying to have that debate in a way that average Americans can understand and communicate effectively in that way.

　　Again, I wouldn't speak in those ways, but I think he certainly is entitled to speak in those ways.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF: Well, I just want to come back to you quickly, Professor Cassell, and read to you what President Trump said in one of his remarks.

　　He said: "This judge opens up our country to potential terrorists." He said, "If something happens, blame him and the court system."

　　You think that's within the bounds of what a president can say?

　　PAUL CASSELL: Yes, absolutely. What's at stake in this immigration debate is a debate about whether we're effectively protecting our country from terrorism.

　　And so to point to the consequences of an adverse¹⁶ ruling is exactly what the government lawyers are doing out in the Ninth Circuit and I assume will be doing soon to the Supreme Court.

　　JUDY WOODRUFF: And we do expect — we have ever reason to assume the White House, the administration will continue to challenge and to appeal that decision.

　　Well, we want to thank both of you, Professor Paul Cassell, Justice Rebecca Kourlis. We appreciate you joining us. Thank you.

　　REBECCA KOURLIS: Thank you, Judy.

　　PAUL CASSELL: Thank you.

1 controversy   

n.争论，辩论，争吵

参考例句：

• That is a fact beyond controversy.那是一个无可争论的事实。
• We ran the risk of becoming the butt of every controversy.我们要冒使自己在所有的纷争中都成为众矢之的的风险。

2 trump   

n.王牌，法宝；v.打出王牌，吹喇叭

参考例句：

• He was never able to trump up the courage to have a showdown.他始终鼓不起勇气摊牌。
• The coach saved his star player for a trump card.教练保留他的明星选手，作为他的王牌。

3 supreme   

adj.极度的，最重要的；至高的，最高的

参考例句：

• It was the supreme moment in his life.那是他一生中最重要的时刻。
• He handed up the indictment to the supreme court.他把起诉书送交最高法院。

4 advancement   

n.前进，促进，提升

参考例句：

• His new contribution to the advancement of physiology was well appreciated.他对生理学发展的新贡献获得高度赞赏。
• The aim of a university should be the advancement of learning.大学的目标应是促进学术。

5 legitimacy   

n.合法，正当

参考例句：

• The newspaper was directly challenging the government's legitimacy.报纸直接质疑政府的合法性。
• Managing from the top down,we operate with full legitimacy.我们进行由上而下的管理有充分的合法性。

6 impartiality   

n. 公平, 无私, 不偏

参考例句：

• He shows impartiality and detachment. 他表现得不偏不倚，超然事外。
• Impartiality is essential to a judge. 公平是当法官所必需的。

7 biased   

a.有偏见的

参考例句：

• a school biased towards music and art 一所偏重音乐和艺术的学校
• The Methods: They employed were heavily biased in the gentry's favour. 他们采用的方法严重偏袒中上阶级。

8 activist   

n.活动分子，积极分子

参考例句：

• He's been a trade union activist for many years.多年来他一直是工会的积极分子。
• He is a social activist in our factory.他是我厂的社会活动积极分子。

9 activists   

n.（政治活动的）积极分子，活动家( activist的名词复数 )

参考例句：

• His research work was attacked by animal rights activists . 他的研究受到了动物权益维护者的抨击。
• Party activists with lower middle class pedigrees are numerous. 党的激进分子中有很多出身于中产阶级下层。 来自《简明英汉词典》

10 discourse   

n.论文，演说；谈话；话语；vi.讲述，著述

参考例句：

• We'll discourse on the subject tonight.我们今晚要谈论这个问题。
• He fell into discourse with the customers who were drinking at the counter.他和站在柜台旁的酒客谈了起来。

11 violation   

n.违反(行为)，违背(行为)，侵犯

参考例句：

• He roared that was a violation of the rules.他大声说，那是违反规则的。
• He was fined 200 dollars for violation of traffic regulation.他因违反交通规则被罚款200美元。

12 nuance   

n.(意义、意见、颜色)细微差别

参考例句：

• These users will easily learn each nuance of the applications they use.这些用户会很快了解他们所使用程序的每一细微差别。
• I wish I hadn't become so conscious of every little nuance.我希望我不要变得这样去思索一切琐碎之事。

13 elegance   

n.优雅；优美，雅致；精致，巧妙

参考例句：

• The furnishings in the room imparted an air of elegance.这个房间的家具带给这房间一种优雅的气氛。
• John has been known for his sartorial elegance.约翰因为衣着讲究而出名。

14 complexities   

复杂性(complexity的名词复数)； 复杂的事物

参考例句：

• The complexities of life bothered him. 生活的复杂使他困惑。
• The complexities of life bothered me. 生活的杂乱事儿使我心烦。

15 robust   

adj.强壮的，强健的，粗野的，需要体力的，浓的

参考例句：

• She is too tall and robust.她个子太高，身体太壮。
• China wants to keep growth robust to reduce poverty and avoid job losses,AP commented.美联社评论道，中国希望保持经济强势增长，以减少贫困和失业状况。

16 adverse   

adj.不利的；有害的；敌对的，不友好的

参考例句：

• He is adverse to going abroad.他反对出国。
• The improper use of medicine could lead to severe adverse reactions.用药不当会产生严重的不良反应。