The Supreme Court made new rules about the President. Now, the President can fire more people in government agencies.

最高法院制定了關於總統的新規則。現在總統可以解雇更多政府機構的人員。

The Court says the President can fire leaders of many government groups. He does not need a special reason to do this. This gives the President more control.

法院表示總統可以解雇許多政府機構的領導人。他不需要特殊理由即可這樣做。這賦予了總統更多控制權。

However, the Federal Reserve is different. The Court says the President cannot fire its leaders easily. This keeps the bank's money rules safe from politics.

然而，聯準會則有所不同。法院表示總統不能輕易解雇其領導人。這能確保銀行的貨幣規則不受政治影響。

The Court also talked about other things. They said Mississippi can count mail-in votes from Election Day. Also, Donald Trump must pay $5 million to E. Jean Carroll.

法院還討論了其他事項。他們表示密西西比州可以計算選舉日的郵寄選票。此外，川普必須向 E. Jean Carroll 支付 500 萬美元。

The President now has more power over government workers, but the Federal Reserve stays independent.

總統現在對政府人員擁有更多權力，但聯準會依然保持獨立。

The United States Supreme Court has released several rulings that increase the president's power to fire officials in independent federal agencies, although it kept certain protections for the Federal Reserve.

美國最高法院發布了幾項裁決，增加了總統開除聯邦獨立機構官員的權力，儘管它為聯準會保留了某些保障。

In the case of Trump v. Slaughter, the Court decided 6-3 to cancel a legal precedent from 1935. Chief Justice John Roberts emphasized that officials who use executive power must be accountable to the president. As a result, the president can now remove leaders of independent agencies, such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), without needing a specific legal reason. This means that many regulatory bodies now operate under a system where employees can be fired at any time.

在 Trump v. Slaughter 案中，法院以 6 比 3 決定取消 1935 年的法律先例。首席大法官約翰·羅伯茨強調，行使行政權的官員必須向總統負責。因此，總統現在無需特定法律理由，即可撤換獨立機構的領導人，例如聯邦貿易委員會（FTC）。這意味著許多監管機構現在在一個員工可隨時被解雇的制度下運作。

However, the Court gave a limited protection to Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook in Trump v. Cook. In a 5-4 decision, the judges stated that the Federal Reserve is a unique organization, which means it requires a higher standard for removing its leaders. The Court found that the administration did not follow the correct legal steps, such as providing evidence or allowing a fair response, before trying to fire Cook. While this does not mean governors can never be removed, it helps protect the central bank from political influence over money policy.

然而，法院在 Trump v. Cook 案中，為聯準會理事麗莎·庫克提供了有限的保障。法官在 5 比 4 的決定中指出，聯準會是一個獨特的組織，這意味著撤換其領導人需要更高的標準。法院發現，行政部門在嘗試解雇庫克之前，並未遵循正確的法律步驟，例如提供證據或允許公平回應。雖然這並不意味著理事永遠不能被撤換，但有助於保護央行在貨幣政策上免受政治影響。

Finally, the Court decided on other legal matters. It upheld a Mississippi law that allows mail-in ballots to be counted if they were sent by the deadline, even if they arrived after Election Day. Furthermore, the Court refused to change a $5 million judgment against President Trump in the E. Jean Carroll case and rejected a defamation lawsuit filed by lawyer Alan Dershowitz against CNN.

最後，法院對其他法律事項做出裁決。法院維持了密西西比州的一項法律，該法律允許在截止日期前寄出的郵寄選票在被計算，即使它們在選舉日之後才到達。此外，法院拒絕更改 E. Jean Carroll 案中對川普總統 500 萬美元的判決，並駁回了律師艾倫·德肖維茨對 CNN 提起的誹謗訴訟。

The judiciary has significantly increased the president's control over government agencies while protecting the independence of the Federal Reserve and supporting specific state election rules.

司法部門大幅增加了總統對政府機構的控制權，同時保護了聯準會的獨立性，並支持特定州的選舉規則。

The United States Supreme Court has issued a series of rulings that expand the president's power to dismiss officials within independent federal agencies while maintaining specific protections for the Federal Reserve.

美國最高法院發布了一系列裁決，擴大了總統撤換獨立聯邦機構官員的權力，同時為聯準會保留了特定的保護措施。

In the case of Trump v. Slaughter, the Court delivered a 6-3 decision that effectively nullified the 1935 precedent established in Humphrey’s Executor v. United States. The majority opinion, authored by Chief Justice John Roberts, asserted that officials exercising executive power must remain accountable to the Chief Executive. This ruling permits the president to remove leaders of multi-member independent agencies—such as the Federal Trade Commission (FTC)—without the requirement of 'for cause' justification. Consequently, the legal framework governing dozens of regulatory bodies, including the National Labor Relations Board and the Consumer Product Safety Commission, has been shifted toward a model of at-will employment under the 'unitary executive' theory.

在「川普對 Slaughter」一案中，法院以 6 比 3 的裁決，實際上廢除了 1935 年在「Humphrey’s Executor 對美國」案中建立的先例。由首席大法官 John Roberts 撰寫的多數意見主張，行使行政權力的官員必須對行政首長負責。此項裁決允許總統在不需要「正當理由」的情況下，撤換多名成員組成的獨立機構（例如聯邦貿易委員會 FTC）的領導人。因此，管轄數十個監管機構（包括國家勞工關係委員會和消費者產品安全委員會）的法律框架，已根據「單一行政首長」理論轉向「隨意雇用」模式。

Conversely, the Court provided a narrow reprieve for Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook in Trump v. Cook. In a 5-4 ruling, the majority determined that the Federal Reserve's unique historical status as a quasi-private entity necessitates a higher threshold for removal. The Court found that the administration failed to provide the requisite procedural due process, such as a formal explanation of evidence and an opportunity for rebuttal, before attempting to terminate Cook's tenure. While this decision does not permanently immunize Federal Reserve governors from removal, it reinforces the institutional independence of the central bank to prevent political manipulation of monetary policy.

相反，法院在「川普對 Cook」一案中，為聯準會理事 Lisa Cook 提供了狹義的暫緩執行。在 5 比 4 的裁決中，多數意見認定聯準會作為準私人實體的獨特歷史地位，使得撤換門檻必須更高。法院發現，行政當局在嘗試終止 Cook 的任期前，未能提供必要的程序正當法律程序，例如正式的證據解釋和反駁機會。雖然此決定並非永久豁免聯準會理事被撤換，但它強化了中央銀行的制度獨立性，以防止貨幣政策受到政治操縱。

Beyond executive personnel matters, the Court addressed electoral and civil litigation. In a 5-4 decision, the Court upheld a Mississippi statute allowing the tabulation of mail-in ballots received after Election Day, provided they were postmarked by the deadline. Additionally, the Court declined to review a $5 million civil judgment against President Trump in the E. Jean Carroll defamation and sexual abuse case, thereby finalizing the lower court's verdict. The Court also refused to revive a defamation suit filed by attorney Alan Dershowitz against CNN, maintaining the 'actual malice' standard established in New York Times Co. v. Sullivan.

除行政人事問題外，法院亦處理了選舉與民事訴訟。在 5 比 4 的裁決中，法院維持了密西西比州的一項法令，允許計算在選舉日之後收到、但於截止日期前蓋有郵戳的郵寄選票。此外，法院拒絕審理 E. Jean Carroll 誹謗與性侵案中對川普總統 500 萬美元的民事判決，從而確定了下級法院的裁定。法院亦拒絕恢復律師 Alan Dershowitz 對 CNN 提起的誹謗訴訟，維持了在「紐約時報對 Sullivan」案中建立的「實際惡意」標準。

The judiciary has significantly augmented presidential control over the administrative state while preserving the autonomy of the Federal Reserve and upholding specific state election laws.

司法部門顯著增加了總統對行政體系的控制權，同時保留了聯準會的自主權，並維持了特定州的選舉法。