Not since Eugene V. Debs campaigned from a prison cell more than a century ago has the United States experienced what is now happening: a prominent candidate with felony convictions running for president. And never before has that candidate been someone with a real chance of winning.
自一百多年前尤金·V·德布斯在狱中竞选以来，美国还没经历过这样的场面：一名被判犯有重罪的知名候选人在竞选总统之职。而且此人有相当大的机会获胜，这更是从未有过的情况。

A Manhattan jury convicted former President Donald J. Trump on Thursday of falsifying business records to cover up a hush-money payment to a porn star. He has been charged with dozens of other felonies across three additional cases: two federal and one in Georgia.
一个曼哈顿陪审团在周四裁决前总统特朗普伪造商业记录，以掩盖支付给一名色情明星的封口费。此外还有三宗案件对他发起了数十项重罪指控，其中两宗是联邦案件，一宗在佐治亚州。

For now, he faces no formal campaign restrictions, and he remains highly competitive in polls. But his sentencing on the New York convictions is approaching, on July 11, the other cases are still looming, and the Constitution and U.S. law have clear answers for only some of the questions that have arisen and may still arise.
目前他的竞选还没有受到任何限制，在民调中始终保持很强的竞争力。不过在纽约州被定罪后，他很快要面临7月11日的量刑，此外还有别的未决案件，由此产生以及可能将产生的问题，并不全都能在宪法和联邦法律中找到明确的答案。

Others could bring the country into truly uncharted territory, with huge decisions resting in the hands of federal judges.
这些问题会把美国带入一个真正从未涉足的领域，一些重大的决定将取决于几位联邦法官的裁量。

Here is what we know, and what we don’t know.
以下列出了一些已知和未知的事。

Can Trump still run after his conviction?
特朗普在被定罪后能否继续竞选？

This is the simplest question of the bunch. The answer is yes.
这是所有问题中最简单的一个。答案是能。

The Constitution sets very few eligibility requirements for presidents. They must be at least 35 years old, be “natural born” citizens and have lived in the United States for at least 14 years.
宪法对竞选总统的资格只做出了极少的几项限制。年龄需要在35岁以上，是“本国出生的”国民，在美国生活了至少14年。

There are no limitations based on character or criminal record. While some states prohibit felons from running for state and local office, these laws do not apply to federal offices.
没有基于人格或犯罪记录的限制。一些州禁止重罪犯竞选州和地方公职，不过那些法律不适用于联邦公职。

The Republican and Democratic Parties have guaranteed spots on general-election ballots in every state, and the parties tell election officials whose name to put in their spot. States could, in theory, try to keep Mr. Trump off the ballot by passing legislation requiring a clean criminal record, but this would be on legally shaky ground.
每个州的大选选票上都为共和党和民主党留有固定的位置，由两党告知选举官员在那个位置上写谁的名字。理论上各州可以通过立法要求候选人不得有犯罪记录，从而让特朗普不能上选票，不过这样做在法律上是不太站得住脚的。

“We let states set the time, place and manner” of elections, said Jessica Levinson, a professor at Loyola Law School who specializes in election law, “but I think the best reading of our Constitution is you don’t let the state add new substantive requirements.”
在这些选举中“我们让各州决定时间、地点和方式，”洛约拉法学院专攻选举法的教授杰西卡·莱文森说。“但我认为如果要从宪法出发，不应该允许各州自行添加实质性的资格限制。”

While that view is not universal among legal experts, it prevailed in court in 2019, after California passed a law requiring candidates to release their tax returns in order to appear on primary ballots. A federal district judge blocked the law from taking effect, saying it was most likely unconstitutional. The California Supreme Court also unanimously blocked it as a violation of the state’s Constitution, and the case never reached the U.S. Supreme Court.
并非所有法律专家都这么认为，不过她这样的观点在2019年得到了法庭的支持，当时加州通过了一部法律，要求候选人公布纳税申报表，否则不能登上初选的选票。一位联邦地区法官阻止了该法的实施，并称它很可能违宪。加州最高法院也全票决定封阻该法，理由是违背本州宪法，那场官司始终没能打到联邦最高法院。

What about the 14th Amendment?
那第14修正案呢？

The Supreme Court ruled unanimously in March that states could not keep Mr. Trump off their ballots under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which disqualifies people who “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” after taking an oath to support the Constitution.
最高法院在3月全票裁决各州不能根据宪法第14修正案第3款阻止特朗普上选票，该法规定一个人在宣誓维护合众国宪法后如果存在“对合众国作乱或反叛”的行为，将被取消资格。

Numerous lawsuits had argued that Mr. Trump’s actions before and on Jan. 6, 2021 — which are the subject of two criminal cases against him, but not the one in which he was convicted — met this bar. In December, the Colorado Supreme Court found him ineligible, and Maine’s secretary of state did the same.
多宗诉讼主张特朗普在2021年1月6日之前以及当天的行为已经满足了这一条件（现有两宗对他的刑事诉讼与此有关，不包括刚刚给他定罪的这一宗）。12月，科罗拉多州最高法院裁决他不具备资格，缅因州州务卿做出了同样的决定。

But the Supreme Court — led by a conservative supermajority, with three justices appointed by Mr. Trump himself — concluded that only Congress had the power to enforce Section 3 against candidates for federal office. (Four of the justices, including the three liberals, wanted to allow a wider range of options for disqualification.)
但保守派大幅占优的联邦最高法院——其中三位大法官是特朗普委任的——做出的裁决是，只有国会有权对竞选联邦公职的候选人执行第3款。（包括三位自由派在内，有四位大法官希望能有更多取消资格的选项。）

Congress is not going to do that with Republicans in control of the House. And the 14th Amendment is separate from criminal cases, meaning convictions in the election-related cases would not disqualify Mr. Trump either.
在共和党控制众议院的情况下，国会是不会这么做的。而且第14修正案与刑事案无关，也就是说选举相关案件的罪成判决也不会导致特朗普失去资格。

Congress can designate either groups of people to whom Section 3 applies (such as people who fought for the Confederacy) or specific crimes that, upon conviction, would prompt disqualification, said Anthony Michael Kreis, an assistant professor of law at Georgia State University. But none of the crimes Mr. Trump is charged with carry that automatic penalty.
佐治亚州助理法学教授安瑟尼·迈克尔·克雷斯说，国会可以指定某一个群体（比如曾为邦联而战的人）或具体某个被判成立的罪行适用第3款，从而导致失去资格。但特朗普被指控的罪名中，没有哪一项必然引致这样的惩罚。

“Whether or not Trump is tried, convicted, acquitted, that’s a separate question from whether or not he’s disqualified,” said Richard L. Hasen, an election law expert at the University of California, Los Angeles.
“无论特朗普有没有被审判、定罪和脱罪，都与他是否具备资格不相干，”加州大学洛杉矶分校选举法专家理查德·L·哈森说。

One of the charges in the federal case related to Mr. Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election — conspiracy to violate civil rights — once carried a disqualification penalty, Mr. Kreis said, but Congress removed it decades ago.
克雷斯说，在涉及特朗普试图推翻2020年选举结果的联邦案件中，其中一项指控——串谋侵犯民权——曾经是可以导致取消资格的，但国会几十年前就删去了相关规定。

Could the party replace him on the ticket?
他所在的党派可以换别的人上选票吗？

Now that Mr. Trump has secured a majority of delegates to the Republican convention, the party has no mechanism to nominate somebody else. Under the party’s official convention rules, if a delegate tries to support someone other than the person the primary results bound them to, “such support shall not be recognized.”
特朗普现在已经在共和党大会上获得了多数代表的支持，该党在程序上无法再提出别的人选。根据共和党官方大会的规则，如果一名代表企图支持初选结果之外的人选，“这样的支持不应得到承认。”

Nor have top Republicans shown any interest in another nominee.
何况共和党内的大人物也无意选择别的提名人。

If he were forced to withdraw from the race after the convention, party leaders could replace him then; they considered doing so in 2016 after the release of the “Access Hollywood” tape in which he bragged about grabbing women’s genitals. But this is highly unlikely given how vigorously the party has circled the wagons around him.
如果他在共和党大会后被迫退出竞选，党领导人可以换上别的人；他们在2016年《走进好莱坞》节目录音公布后就考虑过这么做，录音中可以听到他炫耀自己如何抓女人的生殖器。不过考虑到该党现在如此拼死为他辩护，这一次不太可能有换人的打算。

Can he vote after his conviction?
他在被定罪后还能不能投票？

It depends on his sentence. Here’s what we know:
这要看他的量刑。以下是我们知道的：

Mr. Trump is registered to vote in Florida, and people convicted of felonies are disenfranchised there. Most felons in Florida regain voting rights after completing their full sentence, including parole or probation, and paying all fines and fees. But depending on what the sentence is, Mr. Trump may not have time to complete it before Election Day.
特朗普在佛罗里达州做了选民登记，受到重罪判决的人在该州是被剥夺公民权的。佛罗里达的多数重罪犯在服完包括假释或缓刑的刑期，并付清所有罚款和费用后，是可以重获投票权的。但具体要看是什么刑罚，特朗普可能无法在选举日之前满足这些条件。

New York’s rules are somewhat more lenient: Felons there can vote while on parole or probation. And there is a chance that if New York would let Mr. Trump vote, then Florida will too. There’s a provision in Florida law that might apply New York’s standards, because that’s where the conviction happened. A spokesman for the Florida secretary of state’s office did not immediately respond to inquiries on Thursday about that provision.
纽约州的规定相对宽大：重罪犯可以在假释或缓刑期间投票。如果纽约州允许特朗普投票，那么可能佛罗里达州也会允许。佛罗里达有一项法律规定可以适用纽约州的标准，因为他是在纽约州被定罪的。佛罗里达州州务卿办公室的一位发言人在周四没有立即回应有关该条款的问询。

But, as in Florida and almost every other state, felons in New York are still disenfranchised while in prison — so if Mr. Trump is imprisoned, he would be disenfranchised regardless. That would put him in the extraordinary position of being deemed fit to be voted for, but unfit to vote.
但是，与佛罗里达州和其它几乎所有的州一样，纽约州的重罪犯在监狱里仍被剥夺公民权——所以，如果特朗普被监禁，他无论如何都会被剥夺投票权。这将使他处于一种特殊的境地，被认定适合被投票，但不适合投票。

He could petition for clemency, which would require the approval of Florida’s governor — Ron DeSantis, who ran against Mr. Trump in the Republican primary — and two Florida cabinet members. Chris Taylor, the director of external affairs for the Florida Commission on Offender Review, confirmed that Florida residents convicted of a felony could apply to have their voting rights restored through that process even if their conviction happened outside Florida.
他可以请求宽大处理，这需要佛罗里达州州长罗恩·德桑蒂斯和两名佛罗里达州内阁成员的批准，德桑蒂斯曾在共和党初选中与特朗普竞争。佛罗里达州罪犯审查委员会对外事务主任克里斯·泰勒证实，被判重罪的佛罗里达州居民可以通过这一程序申请恢复投票权，即使对其定罪发生在佛罗里达州以外。

What happens if Trump is elected from prison?
如果特朗在狱中当选会怎么样？

No one knows.
没有人知道。

“We’re so far removed from anything that’s ever happened,” said Erwin Chemerinsky, a constitutional law expert at the University of California, Berkeley. “It’s just guessing.”
“这与以往发生过的任何情形都大不相同，”加州大学伯克利分校的宪法专家欧文·切莫林斯基说。“只能猜测。”

Legally, Mr. Trump would remain eligible to be president even if he were imprisoned. The Constitution says nothing to the contrary. “I don’t think that the framers ever thought we were going to be in this situation,” Professor Levinson said.
从法律上讲，即使特朗普被监禁，他仍有资格担任总统。宪法中完全没有提到过不可以。“我认为制宪者从来没有想到我们会陷入这种境地，”莱文森说。

In practice, the election of an incarcerated president would create a legal crisis that would almost certainly need to be resolved by the courts.
在实践中，选出一位被监禁的总统会造成法律危机，几乎可以肯定需要法院来解决。

In theory, Mr. Trump could be stripped of his authority under the 25th Amendment, which provides a process to transfer authority to the vice president if the president is “unable to discharge the powers and duties of his office.” But that would require the vice president and a majority of the cabinet to declare Mr. Trump unable to fulfill his duties, a remote prospect given that these would be loyalists appointed by Mr. Trump himself.
从理论上讲，根据第25修正案，特朗普可以被剥夺权力，该修正案规定，如果总统“无法履行其职务的权力和职责”，可以将权力移交给副总统。但这需要副总统和大多数内阁成员宣布特朗普无法履行职责，鉴于这些人将是由特朗普自己任命的忠实拥护者，这种可能性微乎其微。

More likely, Mr. Trump could sue to be released on the basis that his imprisonment was preventing him from fulfilling his constitutional obligations as president.
更有可能的是，特朗普可以起诉要求释放，理由是对他的监禁妨碍了他履行身为总统的宪法义务。

If he were convicted in one of the two federal cases before the election — an increasingly unlikely prospect, given his lawyers’ success in delaying both of those cases — and then won in November, he could also try to pardon himself or to commute his sentence after getting into office. That would leave his conviction in place but end his imprisonment. Either action would be an extraordinary assertion of presidential power, and the Supreme Court would be the final arbiter of whether a “self pardon” was constitutional.
如果选举之前，他在两起联邦案件中被判有罪——鉴于他的律师成功地推迟了这两起案件，这种可能性越来越小——然后在11月获胜，他也可以尝试赦免自己，或者在上任后为自己减刑。这将维持定罪，但结束监禁。任何一项行动都是对总统权力非同寻常的主张，最高法院将是“自我赦免”是否符合宪法的最终仲裁者。

Or President Biden, on his way out the door, could pardon Mr. Trump on the basis that “the people have spoken and I need to pardon him so he can govern,” Professor Chemerinsky said.
或者，在离开白宫的时候，拜登总统也可以赦免特朗普，理由是“人民已经表态，我需要赦免他，这样他才能执政，”切莫林斯基说。

But a presidential pardon is not an option in relation to the New York case, and would not be in the Georgia case either, because the president does not have pardon power for state charges.
但是，就纽约州的案件而言，总统赦免是不可能的，对于佐治亚州的案件来说也不可能，因为总统没有赦免州指控的权力。

What if he’s elected with cases still in progress?
如果他当选时案件仍在审理中会怎样？

In the two federal cases, most likely, a Trump-appointed attorney general would withdraw the charges.
就这两起联邦案件而言，特朗普任命的司法部长很可能会撤销指控。

The Justice Department does not indict sitting presidents, a policy outlined in a 1973 memo, during the Nixon era. It has never had reason to develop a policy on what to do with an incoming president who has already been indicted. But the rationale for not indicting sitting presidents — that it would interfere with their ability to perform their duties — applies just as well in this hypothetical scenario.
司法部不起诉在任总统，这是尼克松时代1973年一份备忘录中概述的政策。它从来没有理由去制定一项政策，来处理一位已经被公诉的即将上任的总统。但是，不起诉现任总统的理由——这会干扰总统履行职责的能力——同样适用于这种假设。

“The reasons why we wouldn’t want to indict a sitting president are the reasons we wouldn’t want to prosecute a sitting president,” said Professor Chemerinsky, who has disagreed with the department’s reasoning. “My guess is, if the Trump prosecution were still ongoing in some way and Trump were elected, the Justice Department — which would be the Trump Justice Department — would say, ‘We’re following the 1973 memo.’”
“我们不想起诉在任总统的原因，就是我们不想和在任总统展开刑事诉讼的原因，”切莫林斯基说。他不同意司法部的理由。“我的猜测是，如果特朗普的官司仍在以某种方式进行，而特朗普当选，司法部——也就是特朗普的司法部——会说，‘我们遵循的是1973年的备忘录。’”

Like so much else here, this would be legally untested, and it is impossible to say what the Supreme Court would do if the question reached it.
就像这种情况下的其他很多事情一样，这在法律上是未经检验的，而且如果这个问题提交到最高法院，最高法院会怎么做也无从谈起。

What would happen to the Georgia case, a state criminal proceeding beyond the reach of a Trump-run Justice Department, is a harder question still — one the country has never had reason to develop a road map for.
佐治亚州的案件是一项州刑事诉讼，超出了特朗普领导的司法部的管辖范围，这将是一个更难回答的问题——这个国家从来没有理由为这种情形制定方案。

In its Clinton v. Jones ruling in 1997, the court allowed a lawsuit against President Bill Clinton to proceed. But that case was civil, not criminal, and it was filed by a private citizen, not by the government itself.
在1997年琼斯诉克林顿案的判决中，法院允许对比尔·克林顿总统的诉讼继续进行。但那是民事案，不是刑事案，而且是由一个普通公民提起，不是由政府本身提起的。
(本新闻网址：https://www.geilien.cn/news/2024/nysconvicted.html)

Charlie Savage对本文有报道贡献。

Maggie Astor为《纽约时报》报道政治新闻，重点关注突发新闻、政策、竞选活动以及代表性不足或边缘化群体如何受到政治制度的影响。

翻译：Duran、晋其角