2018年10月5日五夜十篇講義

Constitution:TheFirst :TheForthAmendment隱私保：TheSecondAmendment控槍（支持公民擁有）傳統(tǒng)?。篋emocraticParty /Theleft /TheLiberalRepublicanParty /TheRight TheGun 行：ExecutiveTheFederalernmentTheWashingtonTheObamaAdministrationTheTrumpAdministrationTheAdministrationTheTheWhiteHouseTheUnitedStatesTheFBITheCIATheTheFederalReserveThecentral ThesenateHouse=TheSenate101(TheviceThesenateThe TheFederalSupremeNine (8Justices+1chiefThehighcourt(高級)Thedistrictcourt（區(qū)）UnitedStatesCourtofAppealsfortheFederalCircuit(CAFC)（專利ThepatentCaselawprecedent-settingcodelawCheckandbalance制衡①Onafivetothreevote，theSupremeCourtknockedoutmuchofArizona'simmigrationlawMonday—amodestvictoryfortheObamaAdministration.KnockoutVoidNullification②ButonthemoreimportantmatteroftheConstitution,thedecisionwasan8-0defeatfortheAdministration’sefforttoupsetthebalanceofpowerbetweenthefederalernmentandthe主干thedecisionwasan8-0①InArizonavs.UnitedStates，themajorityoverturnedthreeofthefourcontestedprovisionsofArizona’scontroversialntohavestateandlocalen federalimmigrationlaw.themajorityoverturnedthreeofthefourcontestedprovisionsofArizona’scontroversialnStates（tohavestateandlocalenfederalimmigrationlaw.（定語）②TheConstitutionalprinciplesthatWashingtonalonehasthepowerto“establishauniformRuleofNaturalization”andthatfederallawsprecedestatelawsarenoncontroversial.Washingtonalonehasthepowerto“establishauniformRuleoffederallawsprecedestatelawsareNaturalization入籍（歸化③Arizonahadattemptedtofashionstatepolicies/thatranparalleltotheexistingfederal ①JusticeAnthonyKennedy,joinedbyChiefJusticeJohnRobertsandtheCourt’sliberals，ruledthatthestateflewtooclosetothefederalsun.②Ontheoverturnedprovisionsthemajorityheldthecongresshaddeliberay“occupiedthefield”andArizonahadthusintrudedonthefederal’sprivilegedpowers.IntrudeonThreeprovisionsofArizona’snwereoverturnedbecausefederallawsprecedestatelawsare③Arizonahadattemptedtofashionstatepolicies/thatranparalleltotheexistingfederalones..［A］deprivedthefederalofConstitutional［B］disturbedthepowerbalancebetweendifferent［C］oversteppedtheauthorityoffederalimmigration［D］contradictedboththefederalandstate①However,theJusticessaidthatArizonawouldbeallowedtoverifythelegalstatusofpeoplewhocomeincontactwithlawenment.②That’sbecauseCongresshasalwaysenvisionedjointfederal-stateimmigrationenmentandexplicitlyencouragesstateofficerstoshareinformationandcooperatewithfederalcolleagues.OnwhichofthefollowingdidtheJusticesagree，accordingto①TwoofthethreeobjectingJustice—SamuelAlitoandClarenceThomas—agreedwithConstitutionallogicbutdisagreedaboutwhichArizonarules edwiththefederalthefederalstatute法StatueStatus地位：seekstatusandsecuritystatusquoTwoofthethreeobjectingJusticeagreedwiththisConstitutionalTwoofthethreeobjectingJusticedisagreedaboutwhichArizonarules edwiththefederalstatute投票的三個中有兩位SamuelAlitoandClarenceThomas同意這樣一種邏輯，②TheonlymajorobjectioncamefromJusticeAntoninScalia，whoofferedanevenmorerobustdefenseofstateprivilegesgoingbacktotheAlienandSeditionActs.唯一的來自于AntoninScalia，他提供了對于州權(quán)利的更有力的捍衛(wèi)，這種權(quán)利可以追溯到AlienandSedition系列法案。goingbacktotheAlienandSedition=ThestateprivilegesgobacktotheAlienandSeditionItcanbeinferredfromParagraph5thattheAlienandSedition ［A］violatedthe［C］supportedthefederal［D］stoodinfavorofthe①The8-0objectionto ObamaturnsonwhatJusticeSamuelAlitodescribesinhisobjectionas“ashockingassertionoffederalexecutivepower”.Aturnonturnon在這里的意思是：取決于，涉及到，依…而定=dependA=The8-0objectiontoB=whatJusticeSamuelAlitodescribesinhisobjectionas“ashockingassertionoffederalexecutivepower”whatJusticeSamuelAlitodescribesinhisobjectionas(借用他在書中說的話“ashockingassertionoffederalexecutiveThe8-0objectionto Obamaturnson“ashockingassertionoffederalexecutiveThestudents’loveforJPPturnsonwhatAmandescribesinhisweiboas“JPP’strong”resemblancetothesanpang”Thestudents’loveforTangGodturnsonwhathehimselfdeclaredinhiscoursethatIcanguaranteeyourmathematiclearning“qingshuang”withme!②TheWhiteHousearguedthatArizona'slawsedwithitsenmentpriorities，evenifstateLawscompliedwithfederalstatutestotheletter.Totheletter:StatueStatus地位：seekstatusandsecuritystatusquo ③Ineffect，theWhiteHouseclaimedthatitcouldinvalidateanyotherwiselegitimatestatelawthatitdisagreeswith.Ineffect，theWhiteHouseclaimeditcouldinvalidateanyotherwiselegitimatestateitdisagreeswiththestateTheWhiteHouseclaimsthatitspowerofen ［A］outweighsthatheldbythe［B］isdependentonthestates’［C］isestablishedbyfederal［D］rarelygoesagainststate①Somepowersdobelongexclusivelytothefederalernment，andcontrolofcitizenshipandthebordersisamongthem.②ButifCongresswantedtopreventstatesfromusingtheirownresourcestocheckimmigrationstatus，itcould.③Itneverdid④TheAdministrationwasinessenceassertingthatbecauseitdidn’twanttocarryoutCongress’simmigrationwishes，nostateshouldbeallowedtodosoeither.⑤EveryJusticerightlyrejectedthisremarkableWhatcanbelearnedfromthelast［A］Immigrationissuesareusuallydecidedby［B］Justicesintendedtocheckthepowerofthe［C］JusticeswantedtostrengthenitscoordinationwithWethepeopleoftheUnitedStates,inordertoformamoreperfectUnion,establishjustice,insuredomestictranquility,provideforthecommondefense,promotethegeneralwelfare,andsecuretheblessingsoflibertytoourselvesandourposterity,doordainandestablishthisConstitutionfortheUnitedStatesofAmerica.”“我們合眾國人民，為建立更完善的，樹立正Onafivetothreevote,theSupremeCourtknockedout(否定)muchofArizona’simmigrationlawMonday—amodestvictoryfortheObamaOverturn=knockoutamodest溫和政Trumprigid周一以五比三的投票結(jié)果。否定了亞利桑那州法案中的多項(xiàng)條款。這對于來講是一次微弱的政策的勝利。（也可以說是政府溫和的政策的一次勝利）ButonthemoreimportantmatteroftheConstitution,thedecisionwasan8-0defeatfortheAdministration’sefforttoupset(打破)thebalanceofpowerbetweenthefederalernmentandthestates.但是在跟重要的事務(wù)上，8:0的投票結(jié)果使得想要打破其與8:InArizonav.UnitedStates,themajorityoverturnedthreeofthefourprovisions(條款)ofArizona’scontroversialntohave（使）stateandlocalenfederalimmigrationlaw.1 當(dāng)?shù)厝?zhí)行的法律。TheConstitutionalprinciplesthatWashingtonalonehasthepowerto“establishauniformRuleofNaturalization”andthatfederallawsprecedestatelawsarenoncontroversial.TheConstitutionalprinciplesareWashingtonalonehasthepowerto“establishauniformRuleof（歸化）”federallawsprecede（優(yōu)先）stateArizonahadattemptedtofashion制定statepoliciesthatranparalleltotheexistingfederalones.=n=lawStatelawranparalleltotheexistingfederalJusticeAnthonyKennedy,joinedbyChiefJusticeJohnRobertsandtheCourt’sliberals,ruledthatthestateflewtooclosetothefederalsun..OntheoverturnedprovisionsthemajorityheldthatCongresshaddeliberay“occupiedthefield”andArizonahadthusintrudedon()thefederal’sprivilegedoversteppedtheauthorityoffederalimmigration36.ThreeprovisionsofArizona’snwereoverturnedbecausethey [A]oversteppedtheauthorityoffederalimmigrationlawdisturbedthepowerbalancebetweendifferentstatesDisturb=upsetdeprivedthefederalofConstitutionalpowers[D]contradictedboththefederalandstatepolicies第四段41whyHoweverHowevertheJusticessaidthat wouldbeallowedto有權(quán)，可以 verify(確認(rèn)contactwithlaw可以 verify(確認(rèn)contactwithlaw [C]States’[C]States’legitimateroleinimmigrationOnwhichofthefollowingdidtheJusticesagree,accordingtoParagraph4?[A]States’independencefromfederalimmigrationlaw.[B]Federalofficers’dutytowithholdimmigrants’information.[C]States’legitimateroleinimmigrationenment.[D]Congress'sinterventioninimmigrationenment.That’sbecauseCongresshasalwaysenvisionedjointfederal-stateimmigrationenmentandexplicitlyencouragesstateofficerstoshareinformationandcooperatewithfederalcolleagues.5第五段Twoofthethreeobjecting（少數(shù)票）Justice—SamuelAlitoandClarenceThomas—agreedwiththisConstitutionallogicbutdisagreedaboutwhichArizonarulesedwiththefederalstatute(=law).TheonlymajorobjectioncamefromJusticeAntoninScalia,whoofferedanevenmorerobustdefenseofstateprivileges/goingbacktotheAlienandSeditionStateprivilegesgobacktotheAlienandSeditionActs.AlienandSeditionActsstoodinfavorofthestatesItcanbeinferredfromParagraph5thattheAlienandSeditionActs [A]violatedtheConstitutionstoodinfavorofthestates[C]supportedthefederalstatute[D]underminedthestates'interestsThe8-0objectiontoObamaturnsonwhatJusticeSamuelAlitodescribesinhisobjectionas“ashockingassertionoffederalexecutivepower”.TheTheWhiteHousearguedthatArizona'sedwith mentpriorities,evenifstatelawscompliedwith(遵守)federalstatutestotheletter（嚴(yán)格）.outweighsthatheldbytheIneffect,theWhiteHouseclaimedthatitcouldinvalidateanyotherwiselegitimatestatelawthatitdisagreeswith.WhiteHouseclaimedthatitcouldinvalidate（使…無效,）anystatelaw1）otherwise（即使）legitimatethatit（白宮）disagreesTheWhiteHouseclaimsthatitspowerofen [A]outweighsthatheldbythestatesisestablishedbyfederalstatutes[C]isdependentonthestates’support[D]rarelygoesagainststatelawsSomepowersdobelongexclusivelytothefederal ernment,andcontrolofcitizenshipandthebordersisamongthem.ButifCongresswantedtopreventstatesfromusingtheirownresourcestocheck（檢查）immigrationstatus,itcould.ItneverdidTheadministrationwasinessenceassertingthatbecauseitdidn’twanttocarryoutCongress’simmigrationwishes,nostateshouldbeallowedtodosoeither.EveryJusticerightlyrejectedthisremarkableclaim.[D]JusticesintendedtocheckthepoweroftheAdministration.Whatcanbelearnedfromthelastparagraph?[A]ImmigrationissuesareusuallydecidedbyCongress.[B]TheAdministrationisdominantoverimmigrationissues.JusticeswantedtostrengthenitscoordinationwithCongress.[D]JusticesintendedtocheckthepoweroftheAdministration.Adealisadeal—except,apparently,whenEntergyis ,amajorenergyrinNewEngland,provokedjustifiedoutrageinVermontlastweekwhenitannounceditwasrenegingonalongstandingcommitmenttoabidebythestate’sstrictnuclearregulations.whenitannounceditwas（）alongstandingcommitment（承諾）toabideby（服從）thestate’sstrictnuclearregulations.(原因) ,amajorenergyrinNewInstead,the hasdonepreciselywhatithadlongpromiseditwouldnot:challengetheconstitutionalityofVermont’srulesinthefederalcourt,aspartofadesperateefforttokeepitsVermontYankeenuclearpowerntrunning.Instead, hasdonepreciselywhatithadlongitwouldnot:challengetheconstitutionality（）ofVermont’srulesinthefederalcourt,aspartofadesperateefforttokeepitsVermontYankeenuclearpowerntrunning.It’sastunningThehasbeensurfacing（出現(xiàn)）since2002,whenthecorporationboughtVermont’sonlynuclearpowernt,anagingreactorinVernon.1）Thehasbeensurfacing（出現(xiàn)）since whenthecorporationboughtVermont’sonlynuclearpowernt,anagingreactorinVernon.Asaconditionofreceivingstateapprovalforthesale,the agreedtoseekpermissionfromstateregulatorstooperatepast2012.Asaconditionofreceivingstateapprovalforthegetgetpermissiontopurchasea the agreedtoseekpermissionfromstateregulatorstooperatepast2012.(2002agreement)27.Byenteringintothe2002agreement,Entergyintendedto.[A]obtainprotectionfromVermontregulatorsseekfavorfromthefederallegislature[C]acquireanextensionofitsbusinesslicense[D]getpermissiontopurchaseapowerntIn2006,thestatewentastepfurther,requiringthatanyextensionofthent’slicensebesubjecttotheVermontlegislature’sapproval.(anyextensionofthent’slicense)shouldbesubjecttotheVermontlegislature’sapproval.Then,too, wentEitherEntergyneverreallyintendedtoliveby(遵守)thosecommitments,oritsimplydidn’tforeseewhatwouldhappennext.Astringof（一系列）accidents,includingthepartialcollapseofacoolingtowerin2007andthediscoveryofanundergroundpipesystemleakage,raisedseriousquestionsaboutbothVermontYankee’ssafetyandEntergy’smanagement—especiallyafterthe mademisleadingstatementsaboutthe28.AccordingtoParagraph4,Entergyseemstohaveproblemswithits.[A]managerialpractices[B]technicalinnovativenessfinancial [D]businessEnragedbyEntergy’sbehavior,theVermontSenatevoted26to4lastyearagainstallowinganextension.1）theVermontSenatewasEnragedbyEntergy’s2)theVermontSenatevoted26to4lastyearagainstallowinganNowthe issuddenlyclaimingthatthe2002agreementisinvalidbecauseofthe2006legislation,andthatonlythefederalernmenthasregulatorypowerovernuclearissues.Thelegalissuesinthecaseareobscure:whereastheSupremeCourthasruledthatstatesdohavesomeregulatoryauthorityovernuclearpower,legalscholarssaythatVermontcasewillofferaprecedent-settingtestofhowfarthosepowersextend.Thelegalissuesinthecasearewhereas()theSupremeCourthasruledthatstatesdohavesomeregulatoryauthority（權(quán)力）overnuclearpower）3legalscholarssaythatVermontcasewillofferaprecedent-settingtest先驗(yàn)測試)ofhowfarthosepowersextend）thelimitsofstates’powerovernuclearIntheauthor’sview,theVermontcasewilltest.[A]Entergy’scapacitytofulfillallitspromises[B]thenatureofstates’patchworkregulations[C]thefe