最高法院就特朗普的广泛关税是否超过总统根据紧急状态法所赋予的权力进行了辩论。 The Supreme Court debated whether Trump’s broad tariffs exceeded presidential power under emergency laws.

最高法院听取了关于前总统特朗普是否超越他的权限,根据《国际紧急经济权力法》使用紧急权力对几乎所有贸易伙伴征收全面关税的论点。 The Supreme Court heard arguments on whether Trump exceeded his authority by imposing sweeping tariffs on nearly all trading partners using emergency powers under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act. 法官们对总统权力的范围表示怀疑,质疑国会是否明确授权采取这种广泛的行动,并根据主要问题理论和非指控原则提出关切。 Justices expressed skepticism about the scope of presidential power, questioning whether Congress clearly authorized such broad actions and raising concerns under the major questions doctrine and nondelegation principle. 行政当局认为,关税是经济和国家安全的监管工具,而不是增收措施,但批评者和下级法院裁定法律不支持这种使用。 The administration argued the tariffs were regulatory tools for economic and national security purposes, not revenue-raising measures, but critics and lower courts have ruled the law doesn’t support such use. 这一决定预计将在夏季作出,将大大限制未来总统在贸易政策上的权力,并重塑行政部门与立法部门之间的权力平衡。 The decision, expected by summer, could significantly limit future presidential power in trade policy and reshape the balance of authority between the executive and legislative branches.