以下是文章的英文翻譯，已根據您提供的名詞對照表進行翻譯，並遵循人名翻譯格式：

• Executive Yuan Announces Refusal to Implement Third Reading Bills from Legislative Yuan: The Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) government, through a public statement from the Executive Yuan, declared it would not implement bills already passed Third Reading by the Legislative Yuan, including the Party Asset Act, the Broadcasting and Media Act, and the Organic Act of the Legislative Yuan. This move is seen as the DPP government's complete declaration of entering an era of dictatorship.

• Deprivation and Infringement of Legislative Power: This action by the Executive Yuan is seen as openly freezing laws passed Third Reading by the Legislative Yuan, directly depriving and infringing upon legislative power, tantamount to blatantly trampling on the constitutional red line.

• DPP's Stance and Reasons for the Bills:

  • DPP online trolls and supporters claim that the Executive Yuan must resist these bills to "save the country," arguing that the bills proposed by the Kuomintang (KMT) and Taiwan People's Party (TPP) are not "beneficial to the nation and its people" but rather "undermine the constitution and disrupt governance," and thus the Executive Yuan must act as a safeguard for the Taiwanese people.
  • Arguments are spread through online trolls, youth supporters, and media personalities, accusing these bills of being problematic, for example, "corruption clauses," "clauses to revive CTi News," or "assisting in united front work," and therefore cannot be implemented.

• Criticism of the DPP's Actions Lacking Legal Basis:

  • The Executive Yuan is not a Judicial Organ: The President of the Executive Yuan is not a judicial organ or a Grand Justice and has no authority to unilaterally interpret which bill is unconstitutional or whose Third Reading has been invalidated.
  • The Constitution Does Not Grant the Power to "Not Implement": The Constitution only grants the Executive Yuan the power to propose a "reconsideration motion" on resolutions passed by the Legislative Yuan. If the reconsideration motion is not passed, the Executive Yuan must accept and execute the bill. The Constitution does not allow the Executive Yuan to openly defy the Legislative Yuan by "not implementing" a bill.

• Criticism of the Invalidity of DPP Supporters' Arguments:

  • The "Initiating a Vote of No Confidence" Argument is Useless: Even if the Legislative Yuan proposes a no-confidence vote against the Executive Yuan, it would only lead to the Legislative Yuan being dissolved and new elections held, and the President of the Executive Yuan stepping down. However, the President could still re-nominate the original President of the Executive Yuan or nominate someone else, and the Executive Yuan could continue to refuse to implement bills, thus failing to fundamentally resolve the issue.
  • The "Applying for Constitutional Interpretation" Argument is Irresponsible: The Executive Yuan's act of openly freezing bills passed Third Reading by the Legislative Yuan is a clear unconstitutional fact, akin to "stabbing a knife into someone's body," which requires no medical or legal expert to determine if it takes a life. The burden of proof should not be shifted to the opposition parties.
  • Dispute over the Authority to Judge "Beneficial to the Nation/Undermining the Constitution": It questions why the ruling party (Executive Yuan), which only secured 40% of the votes, should decide what constitutes "beneficial to the nation and its people" or "undermining the constitution and disrupting governance," instead of the national legislature (Legislative Yuan) which represents 60% of public opinion. This is an act that undermines the democratic principle of minority submission to the majority.

• Concerns about History and the Future:

  • Exceeding Martial Law Era Powers: Even during the Martial Law era under Chiang Ching-kuo(蔣經國) and Lee Teng-hui(李登hui), the Executive Yuan dared not claim the power to refuse to execute bills passed Third Reading by the Legislative Yuan. The DPP's current action surpasses the authority of previous governments.
  • Undermining Democratic Rules of the Game: If the Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) is allowed to disrupt democratic procedures in this manner, then in future political party rotations, any ruling party could use excuses like "not fair enough" or "does not conform to ideology" to refuse to implement bills passed by the Legislative Yuan, leading to widespread chaos.
  • Self-Defining "Love Taiwan" to Revoke Rights: The criticism is directed at the DPP for self-defining the standard of "loving Taiwan," potentially expanding it to revoke people's voting rights. For example, by judging certain groups (such as elderly mainland Chinese veterans, second-generation mainland Chinese immigrants, etc.) as not loving Taiwan based on their place of origin or accent, and thus depriving them of their suffrage.
  • Lee Jen-hsiu(李貞秀) Incident as an Example: It mentions mainland Chinese spouse Lee Jen-hsiu(李貞秀), who has been married in Taiwan for 30 years, but because she joined the Taiwan People's Party (TPP), the DPP accused her of being "equivalent to a foreigner after divorce." This raises questions about the DPP's attempt to influence others' voting rights through its own ideas.