华盛顿邮报 美最高法院开审密西西比州堕胎法（在线收听）

The six conservative justices on the Supreme Court signaled this week that they're likely to uphold the Mississippi law that mostly bans abortion after 15 weeks of pregnancy.

最高法院的六位保守派大法官本周表示，他们可能会支持密西西比州的法律，该法律主要禁止怀孕15周后堕胎。

The question now is how far they'll go.

现在的问题是他们会推进到哪里。

The Supreme Court is on the brink of a mess -- doctrinal, practical, and political -- and it's hard to see how it is going to extricate itself.

就理论，实际，和政治而言，最高法院正处于混乱的边缘，很难看出它将如何解救自己。

Overruling Roe would get the court largely out of the abortion-deciding business, but it would create a political firestorm just before the midterm elections.

否决罗伊案件的判决将使最高法院在很大程度上脱离堕胎裁决业务，但它将在中期选举之前引发一场政治风暴。

That's our guest, Ruth Marcus, The Post's deputy editorial page editor.

这位是我们的嘉宾，露丝·马库斯，《华盛顿邮报》社论版副主编。

Ruth's a Yale-educated and Harvard-trained lawyer.

露丝是一名受过耶鲁教育和哈佛培训的律师。

This week, she's out with a really important essay on the radicalization of the Supreme Court.

这周，她发表了一篇关于最高法院激进化的重要文章。

After the Court heard the most important case on reproductive rights in a generation, there was no one I wanted to discuss it with more than Ruth. Here's our conversation.

在最高法院审理了这一代人最重要的生殖权利案件后，我最想和露丝讨论这个问题。 这是我们的谈话。

Well, Ruth, this week, we saw the big, long-awaited Supreme Court oral arguments.

露丝，这周，我们观看了期待已久的最高法院口头辩论。

How nervous are you about the future of Roe v. Wade and Planned Parenthood v. Casey after listening to what transpired on Wednesday?

听了周三发生的事情后，你对罗伊诉韦德案（Roe v. Wade）和计划生育协会诉凯西案（ Planned Parenthood v. Casey ）的未来有多紧张?

As nervous as I've ever been. More nervous now, if that's possible, than I was before the oral argument.

我从来没有这么紧张过。如果这些成为可能的话，我现在比在口头陈述之前更紧张了。

I thought the advocates did a very good job of arguing against the Mississippi law, and I thought the argument went about as badly for them and for women across this country as it could have gone.

我认为倡导者在反对密西西比州法律方面做得非常好，我认为这场争论对他们和全国各地的女性来说都是最糟糕的。

Obviously, how the court chooses to uphold Mississippi's 15-week ban matters a great deal.

显然，法院选择如何支持密西西比州15周的禁令事关重大。

What are the options that the justices have, and why does it matter?

法官有哪些选择，为什么这很重要?

I thought, in a case where the advocates on either side could not have disagreed more, it was actually really remarkable that both the Solicitor General of Mississippi arguing to uphold the law and the lawyer for the Center for Constitutional Rights, arguing on behalf of the clinic against the law, actually both agreed that anything short of overruling Roe or upholding Roe wasn't going to be administrable in the future.

我认为，在任何一方的倡导者都不可能达成一致的情况下，密西西比州总检察长主张维护法律，宪法权利中心的律师代表诊所反对法律，实际上，双方都同意，除了否决罗伊案件或支持罗伊案件之外的任何事情在未来都是不可管理的。

There was going to be no way of logically, intellectually, coherently stopping at 15 weeks.

就从逻辑，理智，条理性而言，不可能在15周的时候就停止（堕胎）。

But I think that's not going to necessarily stop the Court.

不过我认为这并不一定会阻止最高法院。

It hasn't always in the past.

过去并非总是如此。

Here's what the Court can do.

以下是法院可以做的。

It can say, "Okay. Previously, we have applied what we call this undue-burden standard to restrictions on abortions before viability."

它会说，“好的。 以前，我们已经将这种所谓的不适当负担标准应用于限制在胎儿存活前堕胎。”

So that could be things like you have to wait for 24 hours or 48 hours.

比如你需要等24小时或48小时。

You have to, if you're a woman seeking an abortion, the same doctor has to give you -- perform the sonogram as performs the abortion.

你必须，如果你是一个想要堕胎的女人，同一个医生必须给你做超声，就像做人流手术一样。

That doctor has to give you a description of what the procedure is and what the alternatives might be.

医生必须向你描述手术过程以及可能的替代方案。

Things like that. It could take that undue-burden standard and say, "Okay. Even though we've previously said that there can be no flat-out prohibition on abortion before viability," that is before 24 weeks, what they could say is, "All right."

类似这样的事情。它可以接受这个不适当的负担标准，然后说，“好吧。 即使我们之前说过不能完全禁止在胎儿存活之前堕胎”也就是在24周之前，他们会说“好吧。”

In the past, we have said that all prohibitions on abortion -- flat-out prohibitions as opposed to restrictions -- are unconstitutional until the point of viability.

过去，我们曾说过，所有关于堕胎的禁令——完全禁止而不是限制——在生命存在之前都是违宪的。

So, 15 weeks, it's not that much earlier than 24 weeks. It doesn't sound that bad to us.

15周，比24周早不了多少。 对我们来说没那么糟。

Most abortions, about 90% of them, take place in the first trimester in any event. So what's the big deal?

大多数的堕胎，大约90%都发生在妊娠的前三个月。这有什么大不了的?

The problem with that argument is, there are some women who are not able to obtain abortions before the end of the first trimester.

这种观点的问题在于，有些妇女在妊娠头三个月结束前无法堕胎。

There are some women who develop health problems or whose fetus is diagnosed with abnormalities into the second trimester.

有些妇女出现健康问题，或其胎儿在妊娠中期（六个月）被诊断出异常。

For those women, telling them they can't have an abortion at 15 weeks is an undue burden as well as for women who haven't been able to scrape together the money and time and everything else in order to obtain the abortion.

对这些妇女来说，在怀孕15周时告诉她们不能堕胎是一种不适当的负担，对那些无法筹集到金钱、时间和其他一切来获得堕胎的妇女来说也是如此。

So you could imagine, and listening to the Chief Justice, you could imagine him saying,

所以你可以想象，听首席法官说，你可以想象他说，

"Okay. We're not saying anything more.

“好的。我们什么都不说了。

We're going to just tell you that 15 weeks is fine, and we're going to leave everything else to the future."

我们会告诉你15周是可以的，我们会把其他的事情留给未来。”

But it is not a line that can coherently hold.

但这并不能贯彻到底。