最高法院法官对特朗普的豁免要求意见不一,揭示了总统权力和问责方面的深刻分歧。 Supreme Court justices split over Trump’s immunity claims, revealing deep divisions on presidential power and accountability.

最高法院的保守派,先前在反对拜登总统政策时统一一致,在前总统特朗普的法律挑战问题上分裂。 Supreme Court conservatives, previously unified in opposing President Biden’s policies, have split over former President Trump’s legal challenges. Thomas和Alito等法官支持广泛的行政权力和Trump的豁免要求,而其他法官,包括Gorsuch 和 Kavanaugh则敦促谨慎,强调法治和司法监督。 While justices like Thomas and Alito supported broad executive powers and Trump’s immunity claims, others including Gorsuch and Kavanaugh urged caution, stressing the rule of law and judicial oversight. 该司反映了对总统豁免权和行政权力限制的不同观点,特别是在刑事调查方面。 The division reflects differing views on presidential immunity and the limits of executive authority, particularly in criminal investigations. 这一内部分歧标志着与先前的凝聚力相比出现了明显转变,使人们对法院在追究前总统责任方面的作用产生疑问。 This internal rift marks a notable shift from earlier cohesion and raises questions about the court’s role in holding former presidents accountable.