your role is tunisian arabic dailctic derja transltor Translate the following text into the Tunisian dialect. Ensure the output is structured as 'Question: ... Answer: ...'. Please capture the nuances of the Tunisian dialectic Arabic. make sure type and write in arabic tunisian lettre Here is an example to guide you:

Question: شنو اسمك؟
Answer: اسمي جون.

Now, translate the following:

Question: Article:

United States District Court Judge for the Eastern District of New York 
  
 Born 1959 in Royal Oak, MI 
  
 Federal Judicial Service: 
  
 Judge, U.S. District Court, Eastern District of New York 
  
 Nominated by Barack Obama on January 7, 2015, to a seat vacated by Sandra L. Townes. Confirmed by the Senate on October 20, 2015, and received commission on October 21, 2015. 
  
 Education: 
  
 University of Michigan, B.A., 1981 
  
 Ohio State University College of Law, J.D., 1984 
  
 Professional Career: 
  
 New York County [New York] District Attorney's Office, 1984-2009; assistant district attorney, 1984-1997; senior trial counsel, 1997-2005; bureau chief, Family Violence Child Abuse Bureau, 2005-2009 
  
 Judge, New York State Court of Claims, 2009-2015; Supreme Court of Bronx County [New York], criminal term, 2009-2013; Special Term for Election Matters, 2013; Supreme Court of Kings County [New York], criminal term, 2013-2014; Supreme Court of New York County [New York], criminal term, 2014-2015 
  
 Fellow, American College of Trial Lawyers ||||| Immigrant rights groups scored a series of early court victories against President Donald Trump’s terrorism-focused executive order limiting travel from seven Muslim-majority countries, but legal experts and administration officials said the impact of those initial legal victories could prove fleeting. 
  
 There is little doubt the orders — issued by federal judges in New York, Boston, Alexandria, Virginia, and Seattle — helped bolster the resolve of anti-Trump protesters who flooded airports over the weekend and turned up by the thousands at the White House Sunday. The rulings may also sour public perceptions of Trump’s directive. 
  
 Story Continued Below 
  
 However, lawyers pressing the cases acknowledged that their courtroom wins so far may directly benefit no more than a couple of hundred people essentially caught in limbo when Trump signed his order Friday afternoon limiting travel to the U.S. by citizens of seven countries: Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen. 
  
 The flurry of legal rulings Saturday and early Sunday do not appear to have disturbed the central thrust of Trump’s order. The directive suspends immigration and tourism from nationals of the seven countries and halts refugee admissions while stricter vetting protocols are implemented. Tens or perhaps even hundreds of thousands of people could be affected by those changes. 
  
 “Obviously, this initial litigation is not on behalf of everyone who will be ultimately affected by the executive order, but it’s the first step in challenging the executive order,” said Lee Gelernt of the American Civil Liberties Union, who argued and won an order in New York Saturday night blocking deportations of those held at airports nationwide. 
  
 “By sheer numbers it doesn’t affect as many people as would be affected by a lawsuit for people overseas, but I think it’s critically important because it’s the first challenge to the executive order. I think there will be broader challenges,” Gelernt added. 
  
 A Trump administration official who briefed reporters on the executive order Sunday night minimized the impact of the early court rulings. 
  
 “The executive order is prospective not retroactive. The purpose of the executive order is to prevent the issuance of new visas until such time as responsible vetting measures can be put in place,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity. “The specific issue of travelers who were in transit during the EO’s [issuance] is by and large a one-time situation. ... It’s a non-sequitur.” 
  
 One Muslim-rights group, the Council on American Islamic Relations, said it planned a new federal lawsuit Monday charging that Trump’s order is unconstitutional because it amounts to thinly veiled discrimination against Muslims. 
  
 That suit could face an uphill battle because courts have rarely accorded constitutional rights to foreigners outside the U.S. However, foreign citizens who are permanent U.S. residents generally have a stronger claim to recourse in the courts. In addition, legal experts say U.S. citizen relatives of foreigners could have legal standing to pursue a case charging religious discrimination. 
  
 Still, presidents have broad discretion over the nation's immigration and refugee policy. A 1952 immigration law gives the chief executive the power to bar "any class" of immigrants from the country if allowing them is deemed "detrimental to the interests of the United States." 
  
 For his part, Trump insisted in a new statement Sunday that he was not discriminating against those of the Islam faith. 
  
 “To be clear, this is not a Muslim ban, as the media is falsely reporting,” Trump said. “This is not about religion — this is about terror and keeping our country safe. There are over 40 different countries worldwide that are majority Muslim that are not affected by this order. We will again be issuing visas to all countries once we are sure we have reviewed and implemented the most secure policies over the next 90 days.” 
  
 The administration also made clear for the first time Sunday night that green card holders would be presumptively exempt from the new policy, unless there was specific reason to suspect them of terrorist links. Carving out U.S. permanent residents could strengthen Trump’s legal hand to defend the policy in the courts. 
  
 While broad challenges to the Trump orders could take months or even years to play out in the courts, immigration advocates involved in the legal challenges already underway had differing views about the immediate impact of the various injunctions judges issued over the weekend. 
  
 While the New York judge’s order barred deportation of people held at airports following Trump’s directive, the order issued by two judges in Boston appeared to go further, requiring them to be released if they would have been under the policies in place prior to the new president’s executive action. 
  
 The discrepancies between different court orders were notable enough for some lawyers to advise green-card holders flying back to the United States to reroute their flights to Boston’s Logan Airport, since the federal ruling there was the most expansive of the injunctions issued Saturday. 
  
 “It’s broader in substance because it’s a prohibition on relying solely on the Trump executive order as the basis to detain or remove anyone who’s otherwise lawfully entitled to enter the U.S. The detention piece is new and the range of people is a little bit broader than in New York,” said Matthew Segal, a lawyer with the ACLU’s Massachusetts chapter. He said he believes the order issued there against detentions under the Trump order was nationwide in scope. 
  
 However, the broad federal injunction issued in Boston raised questions about whether airlines would have to allow immigrants, even from the affected countries, to board an airplane to the United States. 
  
 “Customs and Border Protection shall notify airlines that have flights arriving at Logan Airport of this order and the fact that individuals on these flights will not be detained or returned based solely on the basis of the Executive Order,” District Judge Allison Burroughs and Magistrate Judith Dein wrote. 
  
 Segal said lawyers arguing on behalf of immigrants urged that language as part of an effort to try to limit the disruption to travelers already on flights, as well as those trying to come to the U.S. 
  
 “There was some discussion in the hearing last night of making sure this order would be meaningful, so people could not only get off planes, but also get onto the plane in the first place,” Segal said. “We had been hearing from people throughout the day, folks who were essentially turned away at airports around the world … We wanted to make sure people could get onto these planes.” 
  
 Normally, airlines are reluctant to allow individuals to board flights if they’re likely to be rejected by immigration authorities at the other end. Large fines are sometimes assessed. It was unclear whether the Boston judges’ order would persuade airlines to allow, for example, the boarding of a green-card holder from one of the seven countries listed in the Trump order, even if that person had not gone to a U.S. Embassy or consulate for special additional screening. 
  
 Department of Homeland Security officials issued a statement Sunday night asserting that they were complying with the court orders and that they were instructing airlines to deny boarding to affected travelers. 
  
 “Upon issuance of the court orders yesterday, U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) immediately began taking steps to comply with the orders,” the DHS statement said. “We are also working closely with airline partners to prevent travelers who would not be granted entry under the executive orders from boarding international flights to the U.S. Therefore, we do not anticipate that further individuals traveling by air to the United States will be affected.” 
  
 Two narrower injunctions were also issued Saturday. One order from a judge in Seattle appeared to affect just two immigrants being held at the airport there, barring their removal from the U.S. at least through Friday. 
  
 The other order, issued by a judge in Alexandria, Virginia, Saturday night, blocked the deportation of green-card holders from Dulles Airport outside Washington. That order also required that Customs officials allow green-card holders to consult with lawyers. 
  
 Immigration lawyers, Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and others complained that the access-to-counsel requirement was being ignored. 
  
 At Dulles Sunday, attorney Sara Dill said lawyers have been barred from meeting with detainees and that Customs agents refused to confirm whether anyone is being held. She said several attorneys have discussed filing a contempt order to compel cooperation. 
  
 Most green-card holders in detention at Dulles appeared to be released by late Saturday, although there were reports at least one was deported sometime over the weekend. Attorneys said Sunday afternoon that CBP had pledged to give green-card holders a list of pro bono lawyers and an opportunity to contact them. 
  
 But attorneys and advocates fanned out at airports across the country complained that CBP agents were not complying with the court injunctions — reporting instances of foreigners in San Francisco and New York who faced “imminent deportation." In some cases, Customs reversed course and said it would not remove the travelers from the United States. 
  
 Top administration and White House officials indicated to lawmakers and reporters that the immigrants ensnared by the executive order were all being properly processed and would be released. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said during a news conference in New York that DHS Secretary John Kelly assured him that 42 foreigners stuck at airports across the country would be processed and allowed to enter the United States. 
  
 But advocates said those instructions weren’t being translated to officers on the ground. 
  
 “The last 48 hours has been really full of chaos and the sense of the federal government completely deciding to not comply with the Constitution and on top of that, not providing guidance to the field with respect to arriving immigrants and refugees,” said Marielena Hincapie, the executive director of the National Immigration Law Center. 
  
 Kyle Cheney contributed to this report from Chantilly, Virginia, and Tony Romm from New York. 
  
 Authors: ||||| The judge who blocked part of President Trump’s controversial immigration ban is a former Manhattan prosecutor who favors pearls for herself — and tough punishments for criminals. 
  
 Brooklyn Federal Judge Ann Donnelly, who wears trademark pearls in her ears and around her neck, has handled hundreds of cases in her career, including the one against former Tyco chief Dennis Kozlowski, who was convicted of grand larceny, conspiracy and securities fraud in 2005. 
  
 On Sunday, Donnelly’s former boss, Robert Morgenthau, hailed her ruling that Trump’s order would cause “irreparable injury” to some immigrants if they were forced to return to their home countries. 
  
 “I think her decision was typical of her sense of justness and fairness,” the retired Manhattan district attorney told the Daily News. “I was so honored to see that decision. I think she’s a credit to the bar. We are proud of her.” 
  
 Protesters rally in lower Manhattan against Trump’s travel ban 
  
 Donnelly’s Saturday decision against the executive order reverberated across the country Sunday. Judges in Massachusetts, Virginia and Washington State also signed orders halting parts of the executive order that brought chaos, confusion and protests to airports nationwide. 
  
 Brooklyn federal Judge Ann Donnelly has handled hundreds of cases in her career and issued tough punishments for criminals. (New York Daily News) 
  
 Donnelly, 57, a graduate of the University of Michigan and Ohio State University’s Moritz College of Law, was nominated to the federal bench by former President Barack Obama upon the recommendation of Sen. Chuck Schumer. 
  
 The Senate confirmed her by a 95-2 vote in 2015. The Michigan native began her legal career in New York, working for Morgenthau from 1984 to 2009. In that office, she rose from an assistant to a senior trial attorney to head of the office’s family child abuse unit. 
  
 During her tenure, she prosecuted the case of Sante Kimes, half of the grifter team found guilty of killing a rich Manhattan widow to steal her townhouse. The case was challenging because victim Irene Silverman’s body was never found. The convictions inspired former Westchester District Attorney Jeanine Pirro and the New York State Police to reopen their investigation into the case of real estate scion Robert Durst, the prime suspect in the 1982 disappearance and presumed murder of his wife, Kathy. ||||| Ann M. Donnelly waited half a year for her chance to convince the Senate that she would make a good federal judge. When the day finally came, she packed as many relatives as she could into the benches. 
  
 In her opening comments, she named every single one of them. 
  
 Donnelly introduced the senators to her husband, Michael. Her sister Sarah and brother Thomas. And then their spouses and their four children. 
  
 And to her mother and late father — “I know he is watching,” she told the Judiciary Committee in the spring of 2015. And her two daughters, and their boyfriends. 
  
 And then Saturday night, after a year and a week on the federal bench, Donnelly sat in her own courtroom in Brooklyn while families shouted and cried in airports nationwide. 
  
 ACLU attorney Lee Gelernt announces to a crowd outside a Brooklyn courthouse that a federal judge had stayed deportations nationwide of those detained on entry to the United States following an executive order from President Trump that targeted citizens from seven predominantly Muslim countries. (ACLU Nationwide/Facebook) 
  
 President Trump’s sudden ban on refugees and visitors from seven Muslim-majority countries had interrupted reunions midflight, leaving aunts, nephews, fathers and daughters stranded on opposite sides of security cordons, while federal officials decided who would be deported by presidential decree. 
  
 That’s the night the daughter of Mary and Jack Donnelly — whose speeches and rulings had rarely traveled beyond courthouse walls — became known across the world as the first judge to block Trump’s order. 
  
 Never before in her long legal career had Donnelly gained such attention. Nowhere close. 
  
 Her old college roommate, Darcy Gibson Berglund, remembers the Ohio-raised English major starring in a campus rendition of “Pippin” in the late 1970s but then quickly leaving the stage for the law. 
  
 “She’s an intellectual, she was not going to pursue theater,” Berglund said. But she said her friend retained “a facility with language” after graduating from law school in 1984. 
  
 Donnelly spent the next quarter-century as a New York prosecutor. Her most famous case was against two executives who looted their company — a trial that the New York Times described as “six months of sometimes tedious testimony.” 
  
 The paper recounted Donnelly’s closing arguments in the Tyco International case, when she “at times seemed like a schoolteacher lecturing her students.” 
  
 The executives “believed they were above the law, and they believe the rules that apply to other people do not apply to them,” Donnelly told the jury in 2004. 
  
 The men were convicted. This week, some of Donnelly’s old colleagues praised her demeanor during that trial — one telling the Times she was “the calm center of the spinning wheel,” even then. 
  
 She made state judge a few years after her victory in the Tyco trial, in 2009, and for years handled mostly criminal trials. 
  
 [Trump official appears to walk back inclusion of green-card holders in travel ban] 
  
 Donnelly would later tell senators that sentencing someone to prison “is one of the most difficult tasks a judge faces.” Some of her cases, however, were so horrific it didn’t seem hard. 
  
 “Not only did you strangle this woman, you then chopped her up,” she told a man in 2010, according to the New York Daily News, before sentencing him to 19 years to life for killing his ex-girlfriend and burying her in concrete. 
  
 If the killer were ever released, the paper noted, he would be deported because he had come to the United States illegally. 
  
 Several years later, a populist Republican would begin crafting campaign speeches around violent immigrants. 
  
 But first, Donnelly had to wait. 
  
 And wait, and wait, and wait after President Barack Obama nominated her to the federal court in November 2014, promising she would “serve the American people with integrity and an unwavering commitment to justice.” 
  
 The Senate Judiciary Committee did not hold hearings to approve her for months, a common theme in an era when White House and Congress stood divided. 
  
 [McConnell: We don’t have religious tests in this country] 
  
 “I’m thrilled the committee is finally moving forward,” Sen. Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in May 2015. “I know Ann well.” 
  
 He spoke of her parents in Ohio, and her work prosecuting sex crimes. He told his colleagues of an office Donnelly had left long ago, where “her reputation is legendary.” 
  
 “She is at her core a kind, thoughtful, compassionate person,” Schumer said. 
  
 He asked her family to stand. “You’ll see, it’s a great sight.” 
  
 Donnelly’s mother and a dozen-some siblings, children, spouses, nieces and friends all rose in the chamber. One woman wiped tears from her eyes after Donnelly took the table at the front of the room. 
  
 The senators asked her only two questions, and only about criminal law. 
  
 “It’s a certain risk a judge takes,” Donnelly told Sen. Al Franken (D-Minn.), speaking of times she had tried to rehabilitate rather than punish a young offender, in hopes to “save someone from what is bound to be a life of crime.” 
  
 But mostly, Donnelly spoke of her family before ceding the table and waiting for the Senate’s decision. 
  
 Another half a year passed until the Senate confirmed her, nearly unanimously, with only two nays. 
  
 [Senate Democrats vow legislation to block Trump’s travel ban] 
  
 Yet more months went by before Donnelly was sworn in, quoting Abraham Lincoln in Brooklyn, and speaking once again about her family. 
  
 She made no great news for a full year on the federal bench — until Saturday evening, when protesters thronged major U.S. airports and an executive with the American Civil Liberties Union tweeted directions to Donnelly’s courthouse. 
  
 “Go right now if you can,” he wrote. 
  
 It had by then been a full day since Trump signed an executive order he said would “keep radical Islamic terrorists” out of the country — but which turned out to instantly bar people who had spent weeks or years planning journeys to the United States, and in some cases were already here. 
  
 Thank you Judge Donnelly !! You have upheld the constitution today and America thanks you !! #muslimban #RefugeeBan #RefugeesWelcome pic.twitter.com/KKy9VV3n4h — Guthrie Graves-Fitz. (@GuthrieGF) January 29, 2017 
  
 They had names like Labeeb Ali, who told The Washington Post he had sold his business and belongings in Iraq and obtained a U.S. visa before finding out at the airport that he couldn’t board his flight. 
  
 And Binto Adan, who The Post reported had flown thousands of miles with her 8- and 9-year-old children expecting to see her husband but who ended up being detained all day at Dulles International Airport because her family is Somali. 
  
 “I am looking for my parents! They are elderly!” a crying woman shouted in the same airport that night. And in cities from Dallas to Seattle, bewildered families sought missing members, and the ACLU’s emergency request to stop the deportations found its way to Donnelly’s courtroom in New York. 
  
 She had once been a government lawyer, but that night, she showed little patience for their arguments, The Post reported. 
  
 “Our own government presumably approved their entry to the country,” Donnelly said, weighing the risks of sending unknown numbers of people back across the oceans. 
  
 An ACLU lawyer interrupted the hearing to warn Donnelly that a flier was about to be deported to war-torn Syria unless she acted immediately. 
  
 Donnelly asked whether the government could guarantee that person’s safety and, unconvinced by the answer, issued her order just before 9 p.m. 
  
 Sending travelers back could cause “irreparable harm,” she ruled. She’d turned more eloquent phrases, but this time her written words were photographed and immediately shared across the world. 
  
 Stay of ban removals pic.twitter.com/jZjtidm2IF — Omar C. Jadwat (@OmarJadwat) January 29, 2017 
  
 “Stay is granted,” the executive director of the ACLU Voting Rights Project wrote on Twitter. 
  
 “Stay is national.” 
  
 By early Sunday morning, tearful and exhausted people were emerging from security areas across the United States. They had no guarantee for their future in the United States, but they had a reprieve from immediate deportation. 
  
 And as families filtered out into the cities, the name of a federal judge they’d never heard of was in headlines across the globe. 
  
 An earlier version of this post referred incorrectly to the “federal circuit.” Donnelly is a federal judge for the Eastern District of New York. 
  
 1 of 40 Full Screen Autoplay Close Skip Ad × How people reacted to Trump’s immigration ban View Photos Thousands protested the president’s executive order outside the White House, at Trump International Hotel and at Dulles International Airport. Caption Thousands protested the president’s executive order outside the White House, at Trump International Hotel and at Dulles International Airport. Feb. 1, 2017 Karen Sultan was among scores who came to the “Rally for Immigrants” held at Reagan National Airport. She brought flowers to give to “anyone who might need them.” She’s from Chevy Chase, Md. Michael S. Williamson/The Washington Post Buy Photo Wait 1 second to continue. 
  
 More reading: 
  
 Trump promised disruption. That’s exactly what he’s delivering. 
  
 Trump’s travel ban could make Rex Tillerson’s potential job harder, a former defense secretary says |||||
What is a summary?
Answer: Immigrant rights groups have scored several early court victories against President Trump's executive order limiting travel from seven Muslim-majority countries, potentially affecting tens or hundreds of thousands of people. Federal judges in New York, Boston, Alexandria, and Seattle issued orders to halt parts of the order, helping to bolster the resolve of anti-Trump protesters and potentially altering public perceptions of the directive. However, the initial legal victories may only directly benefit a couple of hundred people caught in limbo when Trump signed the order limiting entry to the U.S. by citizens of Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, and Yemen. Legal experts and administration officials have said the impact of these victories could prove to be fleeting.