作业帮英语翻译JUDICIAL REVIEW AND ADMINISTRTIVE LAWIn Chapter 6,judici
来源：学生作业帮 编辑：作业帮 分类：英语作业 时间：2024/07/14 23:29:33
英语翻译
JUDICIAL REVIEW AND ADMINISTRTIVE LAW
In Chapter 6,judicial review was defined as the power of a court to review the actions of other governmental bodies in order to determine whether or not those actions are consistent with the Constitution.The actions of administrative agencies are,of course,included among those subject to judicial review.However,judicial review of administrative agencies poses problems for courts that may not be present in other areas of the law.First,administrative agencies are highly specialized bodies with highly specialized personnel.Members of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC),for example,are experts in a highly technical field.It would be presumptuous of a judge to try to second guess the NRC’s decisions about nuclear power.Similarly,most judges are not in a position to question the expert judgment of the FAA or the FCC.Second,as noted in the introduction to this chapter,some government agencies process hundreds of thousands of applications for all kinds of government benefits and programs.Excessive judicial meddling into the operations of an agency may paralyze it and undermine its efficiency.In Goldberg v.Kelly,for example,the Supreme Court ruled that Kelly must receive an evidentiary hearing prior to the termination of his benefits instead of after termination,as had previously been the welfare agency’s practice.Although at first glance it might not seem to make any difference whether the hearing preceded or followed the termination of benefits,consider the possible consequences.If someone is receiving benefits to which he is entitled,the benefits must continue to be paid until after a hearing is held.If every ineligible recipient chooses to exercise the right to a hearing,it might tax the ability of the welfare agency to conduct timely hearings,resulting in long delays.Meanwhile,recipients who may eventually prove to be ineligible for benefits continue to receive,at the taxpayers’ expense,benefits to which they are not entitled.Consequently,the number of termination hearings increases for agency employees,and the government continues to pay benefits to ineligible recipients.
不愿意回答的人走开，否则我会补充批评。一楼你闲的吧
JUDICIAL REVIEW AND ADMINISTRTIVE LAW
In Chapter 6,judicial review was defined as the power of a court to review the actions of other governmental bodies in order to determine whether or not those actions are consistent with the Constitution.The actions of administrative agencies are,of course,included among those subject to judicial review.However,judicial review of administrative agencies poses problems for courts that may not be present in other areas of the law.First,administrative agencies are highly specialized bodies with highly specialized personnel.Members of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC),for example,are experts in a highly technical field.It would be presumptuous of a judge to try to second guess the NRC’s decisions about nuclear power.Similarly,most judges are not in a position to question the expert judgment of the FAA or the FCC.Second,as noted in the introduction to this chapter,some government agencies process hundreds of thousands of applications for all kinds of government benefits and programs.Excessive judicial meddling into the operations of an agency may paralyze it and undermine its efficiency.In Goldberg v.Kelly,for example,the Supreme Court ruled that Kelly must receive an evidentiary hearing prior to the termination of his benefits instead of after termination,as had previously been the welfare agency’s practice.Although at first glance it might not seem to make any difference whether the hearing preceded or followed the termination of benefits,consider the possible consequences.If someone is receiving benefits to which he is entitled,the benefits must continue to be paid until after a hearing is held.If every ineligible recipient chooses to exercise the right to a hearing,it might tax the ability of the welfare agency to conduct timely hearings,resulting in long delays.Meanwhile,recipients who may eventually prove to be ineligible for benefits continue to receive,at the taxpayers’ expense,benefits to which they are not entitled.Consequently,the number of termination hearings increases for agency employees,and the government continues to pay benefits to ineligible recipients.
不愿意回答的人走开，否则我会补充批评。一楼你闲的吧
司法审查和行政法律
在第6章,司法审查被定义了,因为法院的力量回顾其他政府机构的行动为了确定那些行动是否与宪法是一致的.行政部门的行动,当然,在那些之中包括受司法审查支配.然而,行政部门司法审查提出可能不是存在法律的其他区域的法院的问题.首先,行政部门是与非常专业的人员的非常专业的身体.核规章委员会(全国咨询中心)的成员,例如,是在一个高技术性的领域的专家.法官设法其次猜测关于核能的NRC’s决定是放肆的.同样,多数法官不是对FAA或FCC的专家的评断的表示怀疑.其次,在本章的介绍中注明,一些政府机构处理对各种各样的政府好处和节目的数十万申请.过份司法插手到代办处的操作里也许麻痹它和破坏它的效率.在戈尔登伯格v.凯利,例如,最高法院裁决凯利必须在他的好处的终止之前接受一次听证而不是在终止以后,以前福利救济agency’s惯例.虽然在第一扫视它也许不似乎产生所有变化听力是否在或跟随了好处的终止之前,考虑可能的后果.如果某人得到他有资格的好处,好处必须继续被支付,直到在听力以后举行.如果每个不合格的接收者选择行使权利到听力,它也许收税福利救济代办处的能力举行实时性听证会,造成长时间的推迟.同时,也许最终证明无资格在好处上的接收者继续得到,以taxpayers’费用,他们没有资格的好处.结果,终止听力的数量为代办处雇员增加,并且政府继续付好处到不合格的接收者
在第6章,司法审查被定义了,因为法院的力量回顾其他政府机构的行动为了确定那些行动是否与宪法是一致的.行政部门的行动,当然,在那些之中包括受司法审查支配.然而,行政部门司法审查提出可能不是存在法律的其他区域的法院的问题.首先,行政部门是与非常专业的人员的非常专业的身体.核规章委员会(全国咨询中心)的成员,例如,是在一个高技术性的领域的专家.法官设法其次猜测关于核能的NRC’s决定是放肆的.同样,多数法官不是对FAA或FCC的专家的评断的表示怀疑.其次,在本章的介绍中注明,一些政府机构处理对各种各样的政府好处和节目的数十万申请.过份司法插手到代办处的操作里也许麻痹它和破坏它的效率.在戈尔登伯格v.凯利,例如,最高法院裁决凯利必须在他的好处的终止之前接受一次听证而不是在终止以后,以前福利救济agency’s惯例.虽然在第一扫视它也许不似乎产生所有变化听力是否在或跟随了好处的终止之前,考虑可能的后果.如果某人得到他有资格的好处,好处必须继续被支付,直到在听力以后举行.如果每个不合格的接收者选择行使权利到听力,它也许收税福利救济代办处的能力举行实时性听证会,造成长时间的推迟.同时,也许最终证明无资格在好处上的接收者继续得到,以taxpayers’费用,他们没有资格的好处.结果,终止听力的数量为代办处雇员增加,并且政府继续付好处到不合格的接收者