帮我翻译一下..感谢...非常急用!!

外语出国  |  教育科学

分享:
2017-08-11

2017-08-11最佳答案

That provision has not yet been read to include governmental inaction as a taking with respect to foreign claims.那条规定还没有被诠释,以便纳入涉外索赔事务中的政府的不作为。The proximity of this field to the foreign affairs power suggests that the courts will be very reluctant to find any constitutional compulsion.将这一领域涉及到外事权利说明:法院将极不情愿找到任何宪法中的强制行为。Although an argument might be constructed on some other constitutional basis, for instance, that the Federal Government has a duty to protect the plaintiff through the implied plenary powers of the Government in foreign affairs, it is not clear what kind of an economic remedy such a rule would provide. 举例来说,尽管会设立一份根据某些宪法基础所设立的协议,联邦政府有责任通过暗指的政府在外事中的绝对权力保护原告,还不清楚这样一个权力会提供何种经济补救。Absent such an alternative basis, the field becomes one governed by statute, overshadowed by the foreign affairs power, and the protection of American property abroad becomes purely a question of governmental policy. 由于缺乏一个备选基础,这一领域就变成了一个法令条规控制的领域,笼罩在外交事务权力的阴影之中,对于美国海外财产的保护也就变成了纯粹的一个政府政策的问题。

其它2条答案

那个供应未读包括政府不活动作为一采取谈到外国要求。这个领域接近度与外交事务力量建议, 法院非常勉强发现任一宪法强迫。虽然论据也许是constucted 根据某一其它宪法依据, 例如, 联邦政府有义务保护原告通过政府的含蓄的全权在外交事务, 它不是清楚的什么样经济补救这样规则会提供Absent 这样一个供选择的依据, 领域成为一个由法规治理, 被外交事务力量投上阴影, 并且美国物产的保护海外纯净地成为政府政策的问题。

好死板.....不明白什么意思

2017-08-11

2(2)
That provision has not yet been read to include governmental inaction as a taking with respect to foreign claims. The proximity of this field to the foreign affairs power suggests that the courts will be very reluctant to find any constitutional compulsion. Although an argument might be constucted on some other constitutional basis, for instance, that the Federal Government has a duty to protect the plaintiff through the implied plenary powers of the Government in foreign affairs, it is not clear what kind of an economic remedy such a rule would provide .Absent such an alternative basis, the field becomes one governed by statute, overshadowed by the foreign affairs power, and the protection of American property abroad becomes purely a question of governmental policy.
2.2
这一条款中没有加入关于国外争议中政府不会干预的内容。在这领域范围内,牵扯外交事务威慑力,法庭则不太会依据宪法裁定。虽然有可能会依据其他一些宪法的原则,例如,联邦政府有责任通过其外交事务的全部潜在政府力量来保护被告,但是政府这样做的结果能产生何种经济补偿仍然还不清楚。如果去掉这种选择,这个领域就变成由现有状况所制辖,笼罩着由外交事务威慑,而保护美国海外财产就成为单纯的政府政策问题了。

2017-08-11