清理版本
最高法院质疑特朗普全球关税的合法性
摘要
美国最高法院对特朗普总统利用紧急权力实施全球关税表示怀疑，质疑行政部门在贸易政策中的行政权力范围。
2025年11月5日，美国最高法院听取了针对唐纳德·特朗普总统依据1977年《国际紧急经济权力法案》（IEEPA）实施全球关税的质疑。来自保守派和自由派的法官们对政府对IEEPA的解释表示怀疑，特别是关于其用于征税的适用性——这一权力传统上由国会掌握。
首席大法官约翰·罗伯茨指出，该法律“此前从未被用来作为征收关税的依据”，质疑政府的新颖应用。大法官尼尔·戈萨奇强调了国会权力可能被削弱的担忧，强调征税权自建国以来一直是独立的。
此案的核心在于IEEPA是否赋予总统在未经国会直接批准的情况下单方面实施关税的权力。包括各州和小企业在内的挑战者认为，这些关税根据IEEPA是非法的且对经济有害，预计未来十年将导致3万亿美元的成本增加。
尽管结果尚不确定，但若裁决限制总统使用关税的权力，将大幅限制行政权力。如果政府败诉，可能需要退还已征收的高达900亿美元的关税。然而，总统仍可依据其他更狭窄的法律实施关税。
法院预计将在数月内作出裁决，可能影响总统在贸易政策中的权力范围及美国关税的未来。
来源
AP News事实核查
使用外部来源和数据库核实文章的事实。
✓
Confirmed
On November 5, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments challenging President Donald Trump's use of the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose global tariffs.
✓
Confirmed
Justices from both conservative and liberal backgrounds expressed skepticism about the administration's interpretation of IEEPA, particularly concerning its application to impose taxes—a power traditionally held by Congress.
✓
Confirmed
Chief Justice John Roberts noted that the law had 'never before been used to justify tariffs,' questioning the administration's novel application.
✓
Confirmed
Justice Neil Gorsuch highlighted concerns about the potential erosion of congressional authority, emphasizing that the power to tax has been distinct since the nation's founding.
✓
Confirmed
The case centers on whether the IEEPA grants the president the authority to unilaterally impose tariffs without direct congressional approval.
✓
Confirmed
Challengers, including states and small businesses, argue that the tariffs are illegal under IEEPA and economically harmful, with projections of $3 trillion in increased costs over a decade.
✓
Confirmed
If the administration loses, it might need to refund up to $90 billion already collected.
✓
Confirmed