来源：《美联社新闻》
原文刊登日期：2022年4月6日
The Supreme Court on Wednesday reinstated for now a Trump-era rule that curtails the power of states and Native American tribes to block pipelines and other energy projects that can pollute rivers, streams and other waterways.
美国最高法院周三暂时恢复了特朗普时代的一项规定，该规定限制了各州和美国原住民部落阻止可能污染河流、溪流和其他水道的管道和其他能源项目的权力。
In a decision that split the court 5-4, the justices agreed to halt a lower court judge’s order throwing out the rule. The high court’s action does not interfere with the Biden administration’s plan to rewrite the rule. Work on a revision has begun, but the administration has said a final rule is not expected until the spring of 2023. The Trump-era rule will remain in effect in the meantime.
最高法院以5票赞成、4票反对的结果做出决定，大法官们同意终止一名下级法院法官做出的推翻该法规的命令。最高法院的行动并不妨碍拜登政府重写这一法规的计划。修订工作已经开始，但拜登政府表示，最终法规预计要到2023年春天才会出台。在此期间，特朗普时代的法规将继续有效。
The court’s three liberal justices and Chief Justice John Roberts dissented. The court’s other conservative justices, including three nominated by President Donald Trump, voted to reinstate the rule.
最高法院的三位自由派大法官和首席大法官约翰·罗伯茨持不同意见。最高法院的其他保守派大法官，包括唐纳德·特朗普总统提名的三名大法官，投票赞成恢复特朗普时代制定的法规。
Writing for the dissenters, Justice Elena Kagan said the group of states and industry associations that had asked for the lower court’s ruling to be put on hold had not shown the extraordinary circumstances necessary to grant that request.
大法官埃琳娜•卡根代表持不同意见的大法官撰文称，要求暂缓下级法院裁决的州和行业协会，没有显示出准予这一复审请求所需的特殊情况。
Kagan said the group had failed to demonstrate their harm if the judge’s decision were left in place. She said the group had not identified a “single project that a State has obstructed” in the months since the judge’s decision and had twice delayed making a request, indicating it was not urgent.
卡根说，请求方无法证明如果法官的判决仍然有效，自己会受到的伤害。她说，在法官做出决定后的几个月里，请求方没有发现“哪个州阻挠了哪个项目”，并且两次推迟提出复审请求，表明请求并不紧急。
Kagan said the court’s majority had gone “astray” in granting the emergency petition and was misusing the process for dealing with such requests. That process is sometimes called the court’s “shadow docket” because the court provides a decision quickly without the full argument. The liberal justices have recently been critical of its use.
卡根表示，最高法院多数派在准予紧急请求时“误入歧途”，滥用了处理此类请求的程序。这一过程有时被称为最高法院的“影子待审案件表”，因为最高法院在没有全面的辩论的情况下迅速作出裁决。自由派大法官最近对它的使用提出了批评。
As is typical, the justices in the majority did not explain their reasoning. Kagan wrote that her colleagues’ decision “renders the Court’s emergency docket not for emergencies at all.”
像往常一样，多数派大法官没有解释他们的理由。卡根写道，她的同事们的决定“使最高法院的紧急案件表根本不是为紧急情况准备的。”
The section of federal law at issue in the case is Section 401 of the Clean Water Act. For decades, it had been the rule that a federal agency could not issue a license or permit to conduct any activity that could result in any discharge into navigable waters unless the affected state or tribe certified that the discharge complied with the Clean Water Act and state law, or waived certification.
本案涉及的联邦法律条款是《清洁水法》第401条。几十年来，这一条法律规定，联邦机构不得为任何可能导致排放进入通航水域的活动颁发许可证，除非受影响的州或部落能鉴定排放符合《清洁水法》和各州法律，或放弃鉴定。
The Trump administration in 2020 curtailed that review power after complaints from Republicans in Congress and the fossil fuel industry that state officials had used the permitting process to stop new energy projects. The Trump administration said its actions would advance then-President Donald Trump’s goal to fast-track energy projects such as oil and natural gas pipelines.
特朗普政府在2020年削减了这种审查权力，此前国会中的共和党人和化石燃料行业抱怨称，各州官员利用许可程序阻止了新的能源项目。特朗普政府表示，其行动将推进时任总统唐纳德·特朗普加快石油和天然气管道等能源项目的目标。
States, Native American Tribes and environmental groups sued. Several mostly Republican-led states, a national trade association representing the oil and gas industry and others have intervened in the case to defend the Trump-era rule.
各州、美国原住民部落和环保组织提起了诉讼。几个主要由共和党人领导的州，一个代表石油和天然气行业的全国同业协会，以及其他一些组织随后介入此案，为特朗普时代的法规辩护。