航空公司会因为你拒绝戴口罩而把你列入禁飞名单吗?

航空公司会因为你拒绝戴口罩而把你列入禁飞名单吗?

Early this week, Delta Air Lines made news after a plane headed to Atlanta circled back to its gate in Detroit, delaying takeoff. The crew was returning to expel two passengers who had been unwilling to follow a new but quintessential coronavirus rule.

本周早些时候，达美航空公司登上新闻，一架飞往亚特兰大的飞机盘旋飞回底特律的登机口，延误了起飞。机组人员返回机场是为了驱逐两名乘客，这两名乘客不愿遵守一项新的但非常典型的冠状病毒规则。

They had refused to don masks.

他们拒绝戴口罩。

When it comes to the new rules for the novel coronavirus, airlines like Delta are taking them very seriously. So far, the carrier has banned 100 anti-maskers from taking their flights and gone a step further by adding them to a "no fly" list.

当谈到针对新型冠状病毒的新规定时，像达美这样的航空公司都非常重视。到目前为止，该公司已经禁止了100名反戴口罩人员搭乘他们的航班，并更进一步，将他们加入了“禁飞”名单。

In a statement provided to NPR, Delta wrote: "Medical research tells us that wearing a mask is one of the most effective ways to reduce the COVID-19 infection rate." The airline "remains committed to requiring customers and employees to wear a mask or face covering as a consistent layer of protection across all Delta touchpoints."

在提供给美国国家公共电台的一份声明中，达美航空公司写道:“医学研究告诉我们，戴口罩是降低COVID-19感染率的最有效方法之一。”达美航空“继续要求客户和员工在所有达美航空公司接触点佩戴口罩或面罩，作为一致的防护层。”

Many private businesses have similar rules: Be Masked or Be Gone.

许多私营企业也有类似的规定:要么戴口罩，要么走人。

Though the scientific consensus is clear and strong that masks are critical in stemming the spread of the virus, some consumers feel aggrieved by what they consider an attack on personal freedom. But according to aviation, health and legal experts, such outrage ignores a few fundamentals: In entering into agreements (read: contracts) with airline carriers (by purchasing a ticket), you're required to adhere to their policies.

尽管科学界的共识明确而有力地表明，口罩对遏制病毒的传播至关重要，但一些消费者认为这是对个人自由的攻击，因此感到愤愤不平。但航空、健康和法律专家表示，这种愤怒忽视了一些基本原则: 在与航空公司(通过购买机票)签订协议(即合同)时，你必须遵守他们的政策。

In other words, Delta's no-fly list is perfectly within its scope of rights, experts stress.

换言之，专家强调，达美航空的禁飞名单完全在其权利范围之内。

The legal reasoning is pretty straightforward, says Sharona Hoffman, co-director of Case Western Reserve University's Law-Medicine Center. She puts it simply: "They're a private business, and private businesses can have rules."

凯斯西储大学法律-医学中心联席主任沙洛娜·霍夫曼说，法律上的理由很简单。她简单地说:“他们是私营企业，私营企业可以有规则。”

So why do some people think airline mask mandates are a violation of their freedom? Part of the misconception, explains Eduardo Angeles, a lawyer who served as Federal Aviation Administration associate administrator for airports during President Barack Obama's administration, is the confusion about what exactly a "right" is.

那么，为什么有些人会认为航空公司要求戴口罩侵犯了他们的自由呢?曾在巴拉克•奥巴马执政期间担任联邦航空管理局机场副行政官的律师爱德华多•安吉利斯解释说，这种误解的部分原因是，人们对“权利”到底是什么感到困惑。

"No one has a right to fly," Angeles says. Instead, you're just a participant navigating the free market: "You have several options [to get to your destination] — car, train, foot. And in this way, an airline is just like a restaurant: It can deny service to somebody for reasons that are specific to [it]," he says.

“没有人有权飞行，”安吉利斯说。相反，你只是自由市场的一个参与者:“(到达目的地)你有几种选择——汽车、火车、步行。在这种情况下，航空公司就像一家餐厅:它可以以特定的理由拒绝为某人提供服务。”

For those who land on the no-fly list because of mask infractions, processes to get your name removed would likely vary from airline to airline, guesses Angeles. "They have to go through their due process and appeal with the airline."

安吉利斯猜测，对于那些因为戴口罩违规而被写在禁飞名单上的人，将自己的名字移除的程序可能因航空公司的不同而有所不同。“他们必须通过正当程序，向航空公司提出上诉。”