特朗普新版旅行禁令生效，谁会受到影响？

The US Supreme Court has upheld President Donald Trump’s revised travel ban and overruled legal challenges from lower courts.

美国最高法院坚持唐纳德-特朗普总统修改后的旅行禁令，并驳回了来自下级法院的法律挑战。

This is the government’s third version of a controversial policy since Mr Trump took office in January.

这是自从特朗普1月份就职以来政府第三个有争议政策版本。

The latest presidential proclamation - which was issued in September - bans nationals of Iran, Libya, Somalia, Syria and Yemen from entering the US.

9月份发布最新的总统禁令表示，禁止伊朗，利比亚，索马里，叙利亚和也门的国民进入美国。

It also covers travellers from North Korea and certain government officials from Venezuela. But lower courts had already allowed those provisions to take effect.

它还涵盖来自朝鲜的旅客和委内瑞拉的某些政府官员。但下级法院已经允许这些条款生效。

Chad was removed from the list in April.

乍得在4月份从名单中被删除。

This third version of the travel ban has been in operation since December, when the Supreme Court allowed it to go into force as legal challenges went on.

自从12月份以来，这一旅行禁令的第三版已开始实施，当时最高法院允许该法案生效，尽管其继续遇到法律方面的挑战。

The 5-4 ruling at the highest court in the US reverses a series of lower court decisions that had said the ban was unconstitutional.

一系列低等法院裁决称该禁令违宪，但美国最高法院的5-4裁决驳回了低等法院的裁决。

It hands a major victory to President Trump, who made immigration a central plank of his campaign and introduced the first version of his travel ban just one week into office.

这对总统特朗普来说是一项重大胜利，他将移民作为他竞选活动的中心议题，并在就职一周后推出了他的旅行禁令的第一个版本。

Chief Justice John Roberts gave the landmark opinion and the court’s other four conservative judges also ruled in favour of the president.

首席大法官约翰-罗伯茨给出了具有里程碑意义的意见，法院的另外四名保守派法官也作出了支持总统的裁定。

The four liberal justices dissented.

四位自由派大法官则表示不同意。

The original order issued in January 2017 barred people from seven majority-Muslim countries - Iran, Iraq, Syria, Yemen, Somalia, Sudan and Libya - from entering the US for 90 days.

2017年1月发布的原始禁令禁止伊朗，伊拉克，叙利亚，也门，索马里，苏丹和利比亚等七个多数穆斯林国家的公民进入美国，时间持续90天。

It also halted refugee resettlement for 120 days and banned Syrian refugees indefinitely.

它还停止重新安置难民长达120天，并无限期禁止叙利亚难民入境。

Chaos ensued at airports, where there was some confusion about enforcement.

当时机场发生了一些混乱，在执法方面存在一些困惑。

That travel ban was later blocked by federal courts.

该旅行禁令后来被联邦法院否决。

The revised order in March removed Iraq from the list, after it agreed to boost co-operation with the US, and it also lifted the indefinite ban on Syrian refugees.

3月份修订后的命令在伊拉克同意加强与美国的合作之后，伊拉克从名单中被删除，同时还取消了对叙利亚难民的无限期禁令。

It was also struck down but in June 2017, the Supreme Court allowed that version of the policy to take partial effect, against travellers without close links to the US.

该版本也被否决了，但2017年6月，最高法院允许该政策版本可以部分实施，针对与美国没有密切联系的旅行者。

A third version of the ban was issued in September, taking Sudan off the list but adding Chad, North Korea and Venezuelan government officials.

去年9月发布了第三版禁令，将苏丹从名单中去除，但增加了乍得，朝鲜和委内瑞拉的政府官员。

The latest travel ban says that the countries "remain deficient at this time with respect to their identity-management and information-sharing capabilities, protocols, and practices. In some cases, these countries also have a significant terrorist presence within their territory".

最新的旅行禁令表示，这些国家“目前在身份管理和信息共享能力，协议和做法方面仍然存在缺陷，在某些情况下，这些国家在其领土内也有大量恐怖分子。”

Critics have noted that major attacks such as the 9/11 New York attacks, the Boston marathon bombing and the Orlando nightclub attack were carried out by people from countries not on the list, such as Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Kyrgyzstan, or by US-born attackers.

批评人士指出，诸如纽约9/11恐怖袭击，波士顿马拉松爆炸和奥兰多夜总会袭击等主要袭击事件是由沙特阿拉伯，埃及和吉尔吉斯斯坦等名单之外的国家的人士或在美国出生的攻击者所为。

This was a crucial question in the legal battle, as six out of eight countries on the list are predominantly Muslim.

这是法律争论中的一个关键问题，因为名单上八个国家中有六个是穆斯林人口占主要部分。

In one early challenge, a US district judge in Virginia ruled the first order was unconstitutional because it had religious bias at its heart - an appeals court in the same state ruled along the same lines on the second ban too.

在早期的一个法律挑战中，弗吉尼亚州的一位美国地区法官裁定，第一项命令违宪是因为它的宗教偏见 - 同一州的上诉法院也在第二次禁令上也沿用了同样的观点。

Ruling on the second version, the Hawaii court also dismissed the government’s argument that the ban is not anti-Muslim because it targets all individuals from the six countries, regardless of religion, and the countries themselves represent only a small fraction of the world’s Muslim population.

对第二个版本的裁决，夏威夷法院也驳回了政府关于该禁令不是反穆斯林的论点，政府的论点是它针对来自六个国家的所有个人，而不管其信奉何种宗教，而且这些国家本身仅占世界穆斯林人口的一小部分。

"The illogic of the government’s contentions is palpable. The notion that one can demonstrate animus toward any group of people only by targeting all of them at once is fundamentally flawed," the court ruling said, pointing out that the countries’ populations were between 90% and 99% Muslim.

“政府论点的不合逻辑是显而易见的，只能通过针对所有人来向任何一个群体展示敌意的想法从根本上是有缺陷的，”法院判决指出，这些国家有90％到99％的穆斯林人口。

The court also cited statements made by Mr Trump, such as a 2015 press release calling for "a total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States".

法院还援引了特朗普的声明，例如2015年的新闻稿要求“全面彻底阻止穆斯林进入美国”。

But the Department of Justice has said a distinction should be made between things said as a candidate and as president.

但司法部表示，应该对作为候选人和作为总统所说的话加以区分。