(单词翻译:单击)
In 1980, the Supreme Court decided City of Mobile v. Bolden.
1980年，最高法院对莫比尔市诉博尔登案做出了裁定。
At issue was the validity of a common form of municipal government in the South, a commission consisting of three members who were elected at large rather than from individual districts.
争论的焦点是南方市政府常见组织形式的有效性，即一个委员会由三名成员组成，他们是自由选举产生的，而非由各个地区选举产生的。
At-large systems all but guaranteed that even cities with sizable Black populations would have no Black members in elected positions.
自由选举系统几乎保证了即使是拥有相当大的黑人人口的城市也不会有黑人成员担任民选职位。
And indeed, no Black candidate had ever been elected to the city government in Mobile, Alabama, where racial polarization ran so deep that even a white candidate viewed as sympathetic to the interests of the Black community was doomed to lose.
事实上，在阿拉巴马州莫比尔市，从来没有黑人候选人当选过市政府职务，那里的种族两极分化非常严重，即使是被视为同情黑人群体利益的白人候选人也注定会败选。
The plaintiffs in the class-action lawsuit, representing all Black citizens of Mobile, claimed that the at-large system violated Section 2 and the equal-protection guarantee of the Fourteenth Amendment.
集体诉讼中的原告代表莫比尔的所有黑人公民，声称这一自由选举制度违反了《第二条》以及《第十四修正案》中的平等保护保障。
In a 6–3 decision, the Supreme Court made short work of both claims.
最高法院以6票赞成、3票反对的结果，对这两项要求都草草了事。
Section 2, Justice Potter Stewart wrote for the majority, was no more than a statutory mirror of the Fifteenth Amendment, which bars racial discrimination in voting and which the Court interpreted as applying only to intentional discrimination.
大法官波特·斯图尔特代表多数派写道，《第二条》不过是《第十四修正案》的法定镜像，该修正案禁止投票中的种族歧视，最高法院将其解释为只适用于故意歧视。
The Fifteenth Amendment “does not entail the right to have Negro candidates elected,” Stewart observed gratuitously.
《第十五修正案》“没有赋予黑人候选人当选的权利，”斯图尔特无故地评论道。
The Fourteenth Amendment was also a lost cause; four years earlier, in Washington v. Davis, the Court had ruled for the first time that proof of intentional discrimination was necessary to establish a violation of the equal-protection clause.
《第十四条修正案》也是败局终定; 四年前，在华盛顿诉戴维斯案中，最高法院首次裁定，为确定违反平等保护条款，有必要提供故意歧视的证据。
The fact that a policy disproportionately harmed or disempowered one racial group, in other words, was not enough.
换句话说，一项政策不成比例地伤害或剥夺了一个种族群体的权利是不够的。
After this devastating ruling, civil-rights activists turned to Congress.
在这一破坏性的裁决之后，民权活动人士转向了国会。
The Supreme Court had administered something close to a death blow to Section 2, and only an amendment making clear that the law covered discriminatory outcomes as well as discriminatory purpose could save it.
最高法院对《第二条》实施了近乎致命的打击，只有明确规定该法律涵盖歧视性结果和歧视性目的的修正案才能挽救它。
The Democratic-controlled House of Representatives responded quickly and produced such a bill.
民主党控制的众议院迅速做出反应，提出了这样一项法案。
John Roberts, 26 years old and having recently completed a clerkship for then-Justice William Rehnquist, was working as a special assistant to President Ronald Reagan’s attorney general.
26岁的约翰·罗伯茨最近刚刚完成了时任大法官威廉·伦奎斯特的书记员工作，当时他是罗纳德·里根政府的司法部长的特别助理。
His portfolio included voting rights, and in a series of memos that came to light soon after his 2005 Supreme Court nomination, Roberts argued vigorously against the passage of the proposed amendment.
罗伯茨的一系列工作包括投票权，在2005年获得最高法院提名后不久曝光的一系列文件中，他极力反对通过拟议的修正案。
