Courts in the USA made new decisions. Now, the President has more power over immigration. But some courts still stop the President from doing everything.

美國法院做出了新決定。現在總統對移民擁有更多權力，但某些法院仍然限制總統不能為所欲為。

The Supreme Court says the President can stop some people from staying in the USA. The President can also fire leaders of some government groups.

最高法院表示總統可以阻止部分人士留在美國。總統也可以解僱某些政府部門的領導人。

Some lower courts disagree. In Ohio and Rhode Island, judges said the government must process immigration papers. They said the government cannot stop these papers for a long time.

但某些下級法院並不認同。在俄亥俄州和羅德島州，法官表示政府必須處理移民申請文件，不能長時間擱置這些文件。

Now, the government checks people more carefully. This is hard for people married to US citizens. In Wisconsin, courts are still talking about ICE rules.

現在政府審查人員的要求更加嚴格。對於與美國公民結婚的人來說，這很困難。在威斯康辛州，法院仍在討論關於 ICE 的規則。

The President has more power now. However, some judges still check his work and protect some people.

總統現在擁有更多權力。然而，部分法官仍然會監督他的工作並保護部分人士。

Recent rulings from the U.S. Supreme Court and other federal and state courts have significantly increased the President's power over immigration enforcement. At the same time, these courts have set specific limits to prevent the government from overstepping its legal authority.

美國最高法院及其他聯邦與州法院的近期裁決，顯著增加了總統在移民執法方面的權力。同時，這些法院也設定了特定限制，以防止政府逾越其法律權限。

The Supreme Court's recent decisions have helped expand presidential power. The court confirmed that the executive branch can end Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for certain nationalities, limit asylum applications, and deport people to third-party countries. Furthermore, the President now has more power to remove the leaders of independent agencies, although the Federal Reserve remains a special case. Legal experts, such as Elie Honig, emphasize that the conservative majority of the court is not always in agreement. For example, some judges have protected birthright citizenship and limited the government's power to impose tariffs.

最高法院近期的裁決有助於擴展總統權力。法院確認行政部門可以終止某些國籍人士的臨時保護狀態 (TPS)、限制庇護申請，以及將人員驅逐至第三方國家。此外，總統現在擁有更多權力來撤換獨立機構的領導人，儘管聯準會仍是一個特例。法律專家（如 Elie Honig）強調，法院中的保守派多數並不總是達成共識。例如，部分法官保護了出生公民權，並限制了政府徵收關稅的權力。

Meanwhile, lower federal courts have stepped in to stop the government from freezing immigration benefits. In Ohio, Judge Algenon L. Marbley ordered the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to start processing applications for foreign nationals already living in the U.S. He rejected the administration's argument that national security should completely block judicial review. Similar decisions in Rhode Island show that courts are becoming more skeptical when the government stops processing benefits based on a person's country of origin.

與此同時，較低級的聯邦法院已介入，阻止政府凍結移民福利。在俄亥俄州，法官 Algenon L. Marbley 命令美國公民及移民服務局 (USCIS) 開始處理已居住在美國的外國國民申請。他駁回了政府關於國家安全應完全阻隔司法審查的論點。羅德島州的類似裁決顯示，當政府根據申請人的原產國而停止處理福利時，法院正變得更加質疑。

Additionally, the administration has introduced strict vetting processes that affect even those with strong legal ties, such as spouses of U.S. citizens. Reports show that more people are facing intense interviews, which has discouraged many from filing legal documents. At the state level, legal battles continue; for instance, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has paused a case regarding the legality of ICE detainers while waiting for a decision from a higher appeals court.

此外，政府引入了嚴格的審查程序，甚至影響到具有強大法律聯繫的人員，例如美國公民的配偶。報告顯示更多人面臨激烈的面試，這導致許多人不敢提交法律文件。在州政府層面，法律爭端仍在繼續；例如，威斯康星州最高法院暫停了一起關於 ICE 拘留合法性的案件，以等待更高層上訴法院的裁決。

In summary, the current situation shows a major increase in executive power over immigration, though this is occasionally balanced by court rulings and ongoing lawsuits regarding residency applications.

總結來說，目前情況顯示行政部門對移民的權力大幅增加，儘管這偶爾會被法院裁決以及關於居留申請的持續訴訟所平衡。

Recent rulings from the United States Supreme Court and various federal and state courts have significantly expanded executive discretion over immigration enforcement while simultaneously establishing specific constraints on administrative overreach.

美國最高法院以及各聯邦與州法院的近期裁決，顯著擴大了行政部門在移民執法上的裁量權，同時也為行政權力的過度擴張建立了特定限制。

The Supreme Court's most recent term has functioned as a catalyst for the expansion of presidential authority. The judiciary affirmed the executive's capacity to terminate Temporary Protected Status (TPS) for various nationalities, limit asylum applications, and deport individuals to third-party nations. Furthermore, a structural shift in governance was established by granting the President broader discretion to remove heads of independent agencies, although the Federal Reserve was granted a conditional exception requiring 'for cause' termination. Legal analysts, including Elie Honig, suggest a dichotomy within the conservative supermajority, noting that while some Justices align reflexively with administration goals, others—specifically Roberts, Barrett, and Kavanaugh—have occasionally reached outcomes contrary to the administration's preferences, such as the preservation of birthright citizenship and the limitation of tariff powers.

最高法院最近一個任期起到了擴大總統權力的催化作用。司法部門肯定了行政部門有權取消多個國籍的臨時保護狀態 (TPS)、限制庇護申請，以及將個人遣返至第三方國家。此外，由於總統被賦予更廣泛的裁量權來撤換獨立機構首長，治理結構發生了轉變，儘管聯儲局獲得了條件式豁免，要求必須有「正當理由」方可撤換。法律分析人士（包括 Elie Honig）指出，保守派超級多數席位內部存在分歧，注意到雖然部分大法官反射性地支持行政目標，但其他大法官——特別是 Roberts、Barrett 和 Kavanaugh——偶爾會做出與行政偏好相反的結果，例如保留出生公民權以及限制關稅權力。

Parallel to these high-court developments, lower federal courts have intervened to mitigate the effects of administrative freezes on immigration benefits. In Ohio, Judge Algenon L. Marbley issued a preliminary injunction requiring the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) to resume processing applications for foreign nationals already residing within the U.S., rejecting the administration's invocation of national security as an absolute shield against judicial review. This follows similar judicial interventions in Rhode Island, indicating a growing legal skepticism toward the indefinite suspension of benefit adjudications based on national origin.

與這些高層法院的發展平行，低層聯邦法院已介入以緩解行政凍結對移民福利的影響。在俄亥俄州，Algenon L. Marbley 法官發布了初步禁制令，要求美國公民及移民服務局 (USCIS) 恢復處理已居住在美國內的外籍人士申請，拒絕了行政部門將國家安全作為對抗司法審查之絕對盾牌的說法。這繼了羅德島州類似的司法干預之後，顯示法律界對於基於原產地而無限期暫停福利審理的懷疑程度日益增加。

Concurrent with these legal challenges, the administration has implemented rigorous vetting processes that have impacted traditionally privileged classes, such as spouses of U.S. citizens. Reports indicate an increase in intrusive interviews and a chilling effect on legal filings due to heightened enforcement. Simultaneously, jurisdictional disputes persist at the state level, as evidenced by the Wisconsin Supreme Court's decision to stay proceedings regarding the legality of ICE detainers pending a resolution from the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals.

在這些法律挑戰進行的同時，行政部門實施了嚴格的審查程序，影響了傳統上享有特權的階層，例如美國公民的配偶。報告指出，由於執法力度加強，侵入式面試增加，並對法律申請產生了寒蟬效應。同時，州級層面的管轄權爭議依然存在，例如威斯康辛州最高法院決定暫停關於 ICE 拘留令合法性的訴訟，直到第七巡迴上訴法院做出裁決為止。

The current landscape is characterized by a substantial increase in executive immigration power, tempered by sporadic judicial checks and ongoing litigation regarding the processing of legal residency applications.

目前的局面是以行政移民權力大幅增加為特徵，但被零星的司法制衡以及關於處理合法居留申請的持續訴訟所緩和。