斯蒂芬·米勒与记者争辩《外国敌人法》及总统权力
10 min Machine translated Politics
所以你今天早些时候称法官的命令“明显违法”，并且说这是一场对民主本身的攻击。
这是否意味着政府正在无视这项命令？你们也可能无视符合你所列标准的未来法院命令吗？
美国总统及其政府保留宪法赋予的一切权利，以开展国家安全行动，捍卫美国。
《外国敌人法》获准成为法律时，是由这个国家的建国一代制定的，其中有约翰·亚当斯这样的人，该法明确写明，赋予总统权力以击退对美国的外国入侵。
这不是地方法院法官有权决定的事情，以任何方式干预、颁令、限制或约束。
你可以自己读读这部法律。这部法律里没有任何条款规定它须接受司法审查，更不用说地区法院的审查了。
呃，所以，Steven，嗯，当你说这个人完全没有权力时，我们的制度就是这样运作的。
它从这些法官开始，然后逐级向上。在你看来，到了什么阶段，司法系统才可以审视此事并作出裁决？
而且我实在看不出还有什么别的办法，只能从我们现在开始的地方着手，之后最终才能上诉到最高法院。
那么，首先，法律上有个术语叫“可诉性”。这件事不可诉。
换句话说，这件事不能通过司法途径获得救济。
当总统行使《宪法》第二条赋予的权力，保卫国家免遭入侵，或驱逐非法滞留国内的外国恐怖分子，他行使的就是作为三军统帅所拥有的《宪法》第二条核心权力。
委内瑞拉正在入侵美国吗？这是个非常重要的问题。
这是《美国法典》第五十编规定的权限。这是三军统帅的权限。
那么我就问你一个简单的问题，你谈到了这个体系如何运作。
地区法院法官有权指挥或禁止海外部队调动吗？是还是不是？
呃，好吧，Steven，我的问题是，我—— 不，不。换句话说—— 请先回答我的问题，好吗……
我的意思是，换句话说，委内瑞拉—— 不，我，我不，不。但那个，那个—— 委内瑞拉是否正在以某种方式入侵我国，足以—— T-T-TDA……据此行使其权利？
关于这个问题，我先回答你的，然后你再回答我的。
根据该法令的条款，阿拉瓜列车帮是一支外国敌对势力，正如公告中详细说明的那样，它经由委内瑞拉政府指示，来到这里。
该法令规定，总统有权击退入侵，或击退外国政府指挥的掠夺性侵袭。
由一个国家或政府指挥，对吧？他们是国家还是政府？
是。这会是……是的，公告里有记载，那个…… 公告称，TDA是由委内瑞拉政府派来的。
还有一点更重要。根据宪法，谁来作出这个判断？
一个谁也没选出来的联邦地区法院法官，还是……
陆海军总司令？总统，而且只有总统—— 那你是否认为——……
根据法令作出决定，确定什么情况会触发那你认为我们实际上正与委内瑞拉这个主权国家交战吗？
你没在听我说，也没理解我的意思。读读《1798年外国敌人法》。
法条写道：“如果外国政府发动了掠夺性入侵，” 它列出了三项，三项符合条件的行为。
是啊，但是— —这可能是战争行为。法条确实说——也可能，也可能——……
最开始就——它必——必须要对一个国家或州宣战。不，不是。法条就是这么写的。
嗯嗯。不是。错了。查一下法条。就在我社交媒体账号的上面。
我们其实就是在那里找到的。大家都能去看。对，就是这样。
上面写着：“或者掠夺性侵入，或入侵。” 法条规定了三项标准，满足这些标准即可启动《外敌法》。
其中一项是战争行为，顺便说一句，入侵就是战争行为，但先不说这个。
其中一项是入侵，而这正是这里的情况。其中一项是掠夺性侵入，而这正是这里的情况。
所以这实际上满足了法定的全部三项标准，但就这部特定法条而言，公告采用的是 “侵入”和“入侵”—— 好……法条里的措辞。所以，但是—— 不，但这是个非常重要的问题…… 拍几张照片，Steven。
因为，不，不，不，等等。这是个非常重要的问题。
你说，我们的制度运作方式是：美国总统指挥国家武装部队，掌管国家的外交政策，而且这些都受地区法院审查。
这根本不是真的。呃，我从没、从没这么说过，Steven。
那、那从来就没有——我没说—— 那从来就不是真的……
这不是军事行动—— 这、这——我是说，这、这—— 地区法院法官无权禁止将外国恐怖分子驱逐到外国领土，就像他无权指挥空军一号的动向，也无权指挥航空母舰的动向，也无权指示 Marco Rubio 去从事—— 好吧。你认为最高法院—— ……在某个国家进行外交，或不进行外交， ……对此有发言权吗？
比如说，美国最高法院对你刚才在这里阐述的那些事，有没有发言权？
我认为，最高法院会说的，正是我刚才说的：也就是说，总统在此处的行为不受司法审查—— 好。但你承认—— ……因为这些是总统的全权—— ……他们确实在这里有发言权……
这些是……嗯，嗯，这里——尽管你认为他们可能会同意你的看法。
我们预计最高法院会说，一贯以来的情况就是如此，也就是说，总统在行使三军统帅权时，这些决定不受司法审查。
换句话说，总统将“阿拉瓜列车” 指定为外国恐怖组织，并将其指定为敌国侨民属于他固有的全权。
不可能——那系统要到什么地步—— 哥们，根本不可能—— ……史蒂文，你——你怎么能驱逐——……法院又何时获得权力？
等等。你要怎么驱逐我国的非法移民入侵者，他们强奸小女孩，他们谋杀小女孩，如果每一宗遣返都必须由地区法院法官裁决？
这意味着你没有国家，这意味着你没有主权，这意味着你没有未来。
拥有一个国家，却又让 ——从根本上说，两者不能并存—— 让每一次个别驱逐都由一位地区法院法官裁决。
好吧。我只是想弄清楚—— 这不可能…… 在系统的哪个环节，你——因为，呃，呃，特朗普政府到底怎么想？
因为我们这个国家确实实行权力分立。我明白你的意思。对，权力分立。
你的意思是，地区法院无权—— 这是司法部门在干涉—— Stephen，让我说完……
行政职能。让我说完。这就是权力分立。好，这就是权力分立。
你当时是不是无视了法官的命令，因为你觉得自己可以这么做？
所以，法官的命令以及国防部、司法部和国土安全部采取的行动并不冲突，司法部也明确表示，两者并不冲突。
但我要指出一个更根本的问题。所以你认为自己确实遵从了法官下达的命令？
你不认为特朗普政府— —作为……违抗了这项命令吗？
正如司法部所说，法官的命令与我刚才列举的各部门采取的行动之间并无冲突。
但我想表达一个更深层、更根本的观点。是的。
地区法院没有能力—— 可是，既然你们不必遵守，那为什么遵守了？
地区法院没有能力以任何方式限制总统依据《外敌法》所拥有的权力，也无权限制他处理美国外交事务的能力。
我来给你描绘一番。特朗普总统和国务卿马可·卢比奥进行了密集的外交斡旋，以与萨尔瓦多达成双边安全协议。
S— —如果地区法院法官——所以再说一次—— ……可以禁止这项双边安全协议——我再说一次，我懂，我懂 ……那我们就不再是民主国家。 Stephen，你已经陈述了你的观点。
我，我明白。我们没有外交政策。我们已经听你这么说了。我—— 你们有没有…… 无视了……政府有没有无视地区法院法官的命令？我——这只是个简单的问题……
我已经回答了，而且已经回答过了。我，我回答过了，因为这件事—— 司法部已经向法院提交了文件。
不过让我再说一点。这个案子的法官让每一个人都面临生命危险，包括那些飞机上的所有人。
他知道那些飞机里有多少燃油吗？他知道飞行状况吗？
他知道天气状况吗？他知道机组人员累计飞行了多少小时吗？
他知道机组人员需要休息吗？他知道这些事吗？不知道。
好。这位法官违法了。他违反了宪法。所以再说一次，你觉得——他违抗了体制——……白宫—— ……我们拥有的政府—— ……凌驾于——……这个国家的 ……联邦法院之上吗？因为这看起来确实是——顺便说一句—— ……你在这里的论点……这些同样的、这些同样的地区法院法官根本没做任何事来阻止乔·拜登让数百万非法移民涌入这个国家。
这些地区法院法官确实没有发布任何禁令，来拯救……斯蒂芬……的生命，乔斯琳·芒——白宫是不是—— ……或者莱肯·莱利——……凌驾于——……或者其他任何人……联邦法院之上？
你是这个意思吗？我想说的是，你刚才说的那些，权力是分立的。
司、司、司法部门—— 我、我只是——……行使裁、裁决权——Stephen……并给予救济。
我、我不能代表白宫发言。呃、呃，我走了。
你、你是来代表 ——我会…… 你、你是来代表白宫发言的。那我就走，那我就走—— 我只是想让你回答——…… 我会带你一步步理清……
那个简单的问题。我在回答。好吗？准备好了吗？开始。
根据对宪法的恰当解读，地、地方法院法官会向个别原告提供救济让他们获得救济。
地方法院法官无权通常来说，禁止行政部门运作，但总统行使其权力时，法官的权限最低，尤其是作为三军统帅行使权力之时。
我问了你一个问题，你却从来没回答。法官能否禁止部队在海外调动？
地方法院法官能否禁止部队在海外调动？斯蒂芬，是或否……
我、我不打算谈这个，这、这——就说不—— 这——……然后你就知道我是对的……这是另一个问题—— 就说不，你就会知道我是对的……
斯蒂芬。好吧。我们说的不是—— 不，不是……其他、其他部队的任务。因为总统—— 我得问你另一件事，那是——这不是—— 总统发布了一项公告，详细阐述了，委内瑞拉政权如何派遣这个帮派—— 好吧……这个恐怖组织来到我们的国土上。
顺便说一句，我、我很高兴能来这里，但我们看到的所有愤怒……
来自民主党，也来自企业媒体
End of transcript · 1,834 words · machine translated
Original transcript (English)
So you called the judge's order just earlier today, quote, "patently unlawful," end quote, and said that it was an assault on democracy itself.
Does that mean that the administration is ignoring this order?
And might you ignore future court orders that meet the criteria you laid out?
The president of the United States and his administration reserve all rights under the Constitution to conduct national security operations in defense of the United States.
The Alien Enemies Act, which was passed into law by the founding generation of this country, men like John Adams, was written explicitly to give the president the authority to repel an alien invasion of the United States.
That is not something that a district court judge has any authority whatsoever to interfere with, to enjoin, to restrict, or to restrain any way.
You can read the law yourself. There's not one clause in that law that makes it subject to judicial review, let alone district court review.
Uh, so Steven, um, y- when you, when you say that this person has no authority at all, this is how our system works.
It starts with these judges and then continues up.
At what point does it become, in your view, legal for the justice system to be looking at this and making a judgment?
And I, I, I fail to see how there's any other way but to start with where we're starting here before you get to eventually the Supreme Court.
Well, so first of all, there's a, there's a term in law, justiciable.
This is not justiciable. In other words, this is not subject to judicial remedy.
When the president is exercising his Article Two powers to defend the country against an invasion or to repel a foreign terrorist that is unlawfully in the country, he's exercising his core Article Two powers as commander-in-chief.
Is Venezuela invading the US? This is, this is a very important point.
This is a Title 50 authority. It's a commander-in-chief authority.
So just to ask you a simple question, you, you talk about how the system works.
Does a district court judge have the right to direct or enjoin troop movements overseas? Yes or no?
Uh, well, Steven, my question, I- Well, no, no. In other words, the- If you could answer my question first, please ...
Uh, well, Steven, my question, I- Well, no, no. In other words, the- If you could answer my question first, please ...
I mean, in other words, the Is Venezuela- Well, no, I, no, no. But the, the- Is Venezuela invading our country in a way that would- T- T- TDA ... apply its right?
So under the, so I'll answer yours, then you'll answer mine.
Under the terms of the statute, Tren de Aragua is an alien enemy force that has come here as detailed at length in the proclamation at the direction of the Venezuelan government.
The statute says that a president has the ability to repel an invasion or predatory incursion that is directed by a foreign government.
By a state or a government, right? Are they a state or a government?
Yes. This would be... Yes, it is, it is documented the, the TDA was sent by the Venezuelan government in the proclamation.
And here's an even more important point.
Under the Constitution, who makes that determination?
A district court judge elected by no one or the commander-in-chief of the Army and Navy?
The president and the presidential alone- So do you then, do you then think- ... makes a decision of what triggers that determination from statute So do you then think we are actually at war with Venezuela, makes a decision of what triggers that determination from statute So do you then think we are actually at war with Venezuela,
the nation-state of Venezuela? You're not, you're not, you're not hearing me, and you're not understanding me.
Read the statute, Alien Enemies Act 1798.
It says, "If a predatory incursion is perpetrated by a foreign government," so it lists the three, the three qualifying actions.
Yeah, but- It could be an act of war. It does say- It could be, it could- ... in the very beginning it ha- there has to be a declared war against a nation or a state. No. That's what it says.
Mm-mm. No. Wrong. Look up the statute. It's on my account on social media.
That's actually where we found it. Everyone can go see it. The, yes.
It says, "Or a predatory incursion or an invasion."
The statute delineates three criteria for triggering the Alien Enemies Act.
One is a act of war, which by the way, an invasion is an act of war, but put that aside.
One is an invasion, which this is. One is a predatory incursion, which this is.
So it actually meets all three statutory criteria, but with respect to this particular statute, it's, the proclamation is utilizing the incursion and invasion- Okay ... language in the statute. So but- No, but this is a very important question ... take pictures, Steven.
'Cause no, no, no, hold on. This is a very important question.
You said the way our system works is the president of the United States commands the armed forces of the country, commands the foreign policy of the country, and that's subject to district court review.
That is fundamentally untrue. Uh, I never, I never said that, Steven.
That is, that has never- I did not say- That has never been true ... this was not a military oper- The, the- I mean, th- this- A district court judge can no more enjoin the expulsion of foreign terrorists to foreign soil than he can direct the movement of Air Force One,
than he can direct the movement of an aircraft carrier, than he can direct Marco Rubio to engage- Okay. Do you think the Supreme Court- ... in diplomacy in a country or not to ... has any say over this or not?
Like if, does the Supreme Court of the United States have any say over the things that you were just outlining right here?
I believe what the Supreme Court will say is what I just said, which is that the president's conduct here is not subject to judicial review- Okay. But you are, you are acknowledging- ... because these are the plenary-
which is that the president's conduct here is not subject to judicial review- Okay. But you are, you are acknowledging- ... because these are the plenary- ... that they do in fact have a say here ... these are the, the, well, well, here- Even though you think they may agree with you.
What we are expecting is the Supreme Court to say what has always been the case, which is when the president is using his powers as commander-in-chief, those determinations are not subject to judicial review.
In other words, the president's designation of Tren de Aragua as a foreign terrorist organization and as an alien enemy are part of his inherent plenary authority.
There is no way- So at what point in the system- Dude, there is no way- ... Steven, does- How, how are you going to expel- ... do the courts gain power?
Hold on. How are you going to expel illegal alien invaders from our country who are raping little girls, who are murdering little girls, if each and every deportation has to be adjudicated in a district court judge?
It, that means you have no country, it means you have no sovereignty, it means you have no future.
It is fundamentally incompatible to have a country and have individual expulsions adjudicated by a single district court judge.
Okay. I'm just trying to figure out- It is impossible ... at what point in the system do you, 'cause, uh, uh, what does the Trump administration believe?
'Cause we do have separation of powers in this country.
I hear what you're saying. Yes, separation of powers. You're saying the district court does not have authority- I hear what you're saying. Yes, separation of powers. You're saying the district court does not have authority- This is the judiciary interfering- Stephen, let me finish ...
You're saying the district court does not have authority- This is the judiciary interfering- Stephen, let me finish ... in the executive function. Let me finish.
That is the separation of powers. Okay. That is the separation of powers.
Did, did you ignore the judge's order here because you thought you could?
So the judge's order and the actions taken by the Departments of Defense, Justice, and Homeland Security are not in conflict, and the Department of Justice has been clear that they are not in conflict.
But I'm making a more fundamental point.
So you think that you did go along with the order that the judge put out?
You do not think that the Trump administration- As the- ... defied this order?
As the Justice Department said, there is no conflict between the judge's order and the actions taken by the departments I just listed.
But I'm making a deeper and more fundamental point. Yeah.
The district court has no ability- But, so, yeah, I mean, if you don't have to follow it, why did you?
The district court has no ability- But, so, yeah, I mean, if you don't have to follow it, why did you?
The district court has no ability to, in any way, restrain the president's authorities under the Alien Enemies Act or his ability to conduct the foreign affairs of the United States.
Let me paint a picture for you. President Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio had engaged in intensive diplomacy to obtain a bilateral security agreement with the nation of El Salvador.
S- If a district court judge- So again- ... can enjoin that bilateral security agreement- Again, I, I, I get it ... then we do not have a democracy. Stephen, you've made your argument.
... can enjoin that bilateral security agreement- Again, I, I, I get it ... then we do not have a democracy. Stephen, you've made your argument.
I, I got it. We do not have a foreign policy. We've, we've heard you say this. I've- Did, did you ignore the, did the administration ignore the order from the district judge? I've- It's a simple question ...
I've, I've answered, and I've answered it. I've, I've answered it because this, the Department of Justice has made a filing in the court.
But let me make another point. The judge in this case put the lives of every single person on those aircraft at risk.
Did he know how much fuel was in those planes?
Did he know the flight conditions? Did he know the weather conditions?
Did he know about how many crew hours? Did he know the need for crew rest?
Did he know any of that? No. Okay. This judge violated the law. He violated the Constitution.
So again, so do you think- He defied the system- ... that the White House- ... of government that we have- ... is above- ... in this country ... federal courts? 'Cause that does seem to be- And by the way- ... what you're arguing here ... these same, these same district court judges
... federal courts? 'Cause that does seem to be- And by the way- ... what you're arguing here ... these same, these same district court judges didn't do a damn thing to stop Joe Biden from flooding this nation with millions of illegal aliens.
Do, these district court judges didn't issue any injunctions to save the lives- Stephen ... of Jocelyn Maung- Is the White House- ... or Laken Riley- ... above- ... or anyone else ... the federal courts?
Is that what you're saying? What I'm saying is that what you said, there's a separation of powers.
The de- the, the judiciary- I, I just- ... exercises judgment- Stephen ... and relief.
I, I don't speak for the White House. Uh, uh, I go.
You, you are here to speak for the- I will do ... y- you're here to speak for the White House. Then I will walk, then I will walk- I just want you to answer- ... I will walk you through it ... that one simple question.
I am. Okay? Ready? Here we go. Under a proper reading of the Constitution, ju- district court judges provide relief to individual plaintiffs seeking relief.
District court judges do not have the authority as a general matter to enjoin the functioning of the executive branch, but their authority is at its lowest point when the president is exercising his powers as commander in chief.
And I asked you a question and you never answered it.
Can a judge enjoin troop movements overseas?
Can a district court judge enjoin troop movements overseas? Stephen- Yes or no ...
I, I am not gonna get into the, the f- the, this- Just say no- This- ... and then you'll know that I'm right ... this is a separate question- Just say no and you'll know that I'm right ...
Stephen. Okay. We're not talking about- No, it's not ... other, other troop services. Because the president- I need to ask you about something else that's- It's not- The president issued a proclamation d- delineating, in detail,
how the Venezuelan regime sent this gang- Okay ... this terrorist organization to our shores.
And by the way, and I, and I love being here, but all the outrage that we are seeing from the Democrat Party and from the corporate media
Up next
iPhone app Translate videos on your iPhone Paste a TikTok, Instagram or X link, add subtitles in your language and save the video to Photos. 
Made with TranslateMom
TranslateMom transcribes and translates videos from X, TikTok, YouTube and Instagram. Paste a link and you get a page like this one, in your language.