Name: 美國最高法院裁定川普的廣泛關稅違法！| DW 新聞 (US Supreme Court rules Trump's sweeping tariffs are illegal | DW News)
Uploaded: 2026-02-20T17:07:19.000Z
Duration: 7 min 8 s

程度副詞

We begin with some news just in from the United States.

我們先來看看美國的最新消息。

The U.S. supreme Court has struck down most of Donald Trump's tariffs on global trading partners.

美國司法院推翻了川普對全球貿易夥伴課徵的大部分關稅。

Justices ruled by six votes to three that Trump lacked the authority under an emergency powers law to impose the levies.

法官以六票對三票裁定，川普在緊急權力法下沒有權力課徵這些稅捐。

This past year, Trump placed sweeping tariffs on dozens of nations that trade with the U.S.

過去一年，川普對與美國貿易的數十個國家課徵了大規模關稅。

the president has called the case one of the most important in US History, saying a ruling against him would be an economic body blow to the nation.

總統稱此案為美國史上最重要的案件之一，並表示不利於他的裁決將對國家造成經濟重創。

Well, let's cross over to DW's Komodowski in Washington, D.C.

好，我們連線到華盛頓特區的 DW 記者 Komodowski。

misha, tell us more about the Supreme Court ruling.

Misha，請跟我們多說一點關於這個最高法院的裁決。

Well, Terry, the Supreme Court essentially says that President Trump went too far when he imposed sweeping tariffs under a law meant for national emergencies.

Terry，最高法院基本上認為，總統川普在動用適用於國家緊急狀態的法律課徵大規模關稅時，做得太超過了。

And those tariffs are basically subject to his great pride.

這些關稅基本上受到他極大的驕傲。

And the decision does not affect all of his tariffs, but

這項裁決並未影響他所有的關稅，但

it does strike down those put in place under a 1977 law called the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

它確實推翻了根據 1977 年一項名為《國際緊急經濟權力法》所設下的關稅。

So the justices said that the law does not give the president broad power to set tariffs in peacetime.

是以，法官們表示，該法律並未賦予總統在和平時期設定關稅的廣泛權力。

The ruling blocks Trump's reciprocal tariffs, including those on Canada, on China, and on Mexico.

這項裁決阻止了川普的互惠關稅，包括對加拿大、中國和墨西哥的關稅。

They were needed to stop the flow of illegal drugs into the United States of America.

這些是為了阻止非法藥物流入美國而必需的。

Chief Justice John Roberts wrote that the Constitution gives Congress, not the president, the power to impose taxes and duties.

首席大法官 John Roberts 寫道，憲法賦予國會，而非總統，徵收稅收和關稅的權力。

And the court said that the United States is not at war and emergency powers cannot replace Congress.

法院表示，美國並未處於戰爭狀態，緊急權力不能取代國會。

So what does this mean, Misha, for Donald Trump, politically?

那麼，Misha，這對唐納·川普來說，在政治上意味著什麼？

I mean, we haven't heard from him yet, but

我是說，我們還沒聽到他的說法，但是

we have to say that the Supreme Court rarely limits presidential power in trade.

我們得說，最高法院很少在貿易上限制總統的權力。

If I may, the legal reasoning may not shock some experts, however, the political impact is major.

如果可以的話，這個法律上的理由或許不會讓一些專家感到震驚，不過，政治上的影響可是很大的。

A number of constitutional and trade law experts had raised doubts on whether this International Emergency Economic Powers act was ever meant to give a president broad tariff powers.

許多憲法和貿易法專家都曾質疑，這部《國際緊急經濟權力法》是否本來就打算賦予總統廣泛的關稅權力。

This is not the first time that courts have struck down one of Donald Trump's executive actions.

這不是法院第一次推翻唐納·川普的一項行政命令。

Misha，這個裁決有什麼不同之處？

Well, Terry, in the past, the justices sometimes limited President Trump's executive powers, and

嗯，Terry，過去，法官有時會限制川普總統的行政權力，

sometimes they allowed some actions to stand.

In 2020, if we remember, the court blocked his attempt to end daca.

如果我們記得的話，2020年法院就阻止了他想終止DACA的行動。

It's the Obama era program protecting young undocumented immigrants.

這是歐巴馬時代保護年輕無證移民的計畫。

In a case that involved the Department of Homeland Security, the court also rejected his effort to add a citizenship question to the 2020 census.

在一起涉及國土安全部的案件中，法院也駁回了他想在2020年人口普查中加入公民身分問題的努力。

And at the same time, the court upheld some of his policies, including a revised version of his travel ban.

同時，法院也維持了他的一些政策，包括他旅遊禁令的修正版本。

Again, we have not heard from President Trump directly, but we expect it to happen anytime soon today.

我們還沒有直接聽到川普總統的說法，但預計今天隨時都會有。

以上是DW駐華府記者Misha Komodowski的報導。

And Clifford Koonin from DW Business has been tracking this story as well.

DW Business的Clifford Koonin也一直在追蹤這個故事。

Decision is finally here from the Supreme Court.

Clifford, what does it mean for international trade?

Clifford，這對國際貿易有什麼意義？

Well, I think the imposition of these blanket tariffs shook global trade to its very core, and

嗯，我認為這些大規模關稅的實施，讓全球貿易動盪不安，

the removal of many of them will have a similarly large impact.

而其中許多關稅的取消，也將產生同樣巨大的影響。

However, I think we have to wait and see, and

不過，我認為我們還得繼續觀察，

雖然我不太想說「繼續觀察」，但

we're still trying to assess what it means because this is huge.

我們還在試著評估這意味著什麼，因為這件事影響太大了。

But on the other hand, we have to see how Donald Trump reacts.

但另一方面，我們也得看看唐納·川普會有什麼反應。

He can also impose tariffs in various sectors using other statutes that exist.

他也可以利用現有的其他法規，在各個領域實施關稅。

And so much harm has been done to trust and predictability and all of these things that are necessary for global trade to take place that we're going to have to see how it unfolds.

而且，信任和可預測性，以及所有全球貿易順暢進行所必需的這些東西，都受到了很大的損害，我們得看看後續發展如何。

But it definitely is a blow for more predictability for legal action in trade and all of these things that are the stability, the stable background that we need for global trade.

但這無疑對貿易和其他所有這些全球貿易所需的穩定、穩定的背景下的法律行動，帶來了可預測性的打擊。

I mean, lots of decisions were made on the basis of these tariffs being imposed, investment decisions, reciprocal.

我是說，很多決定都是基於這些關稅的實施、投資決策、互惠的。

They were and rose by quite, quite by 0.6%.

它們上漲了，而且漲幅相當大，漲了 0.6%。

then they sort of came back a bit because markets are being cautious.

然後它們又稍微回落了一些，因為市場正在謹慎。

Retail stocks, car stocks, things like this.

But everyone's sort of assessing the reaction and the impact it will have.

但大家都在評估這個反應以及它會產生的影響。

I mean, if we think about how, as you mentioned, you know, how this was a tool that he was able to use, that Trump was able to use.

我是說，如果我們想想，正如你提到的，你知道，這是他能夠使用的工具，川普能夠使用的工具。

the big stick that he was going to carry when he was going to China was going to be the tariffs threat.

他要去中國時會帶的大棒子，就是關稅威脅。

So I think the repercussions of this are going to be enormous.

所以我認為這會產生巨大的連鎖反應。

How might this ruling reshape US Trade relationships and negotiations that are ongoing in some cases?

這項裁決可能會如何重塑美國的貿易關係，以及一些仍在進行中的談判？

Well, I think that a lot of, like if you take the Europeans, for example, who've been very, very nervous ever since Donald Trump came to power, and

嗯，我認為很多，像是如果你以歐洲人為例，自從唐納·川普上任以來，他們一直非常、非常緊張，

particularly since the imposition of the tariffs, I think that they see that the executive powers are limited by law in the states.

尤其是在實施關稅之後，我認為他們看到行政權力受到美國法律的限制。

我的意思是，這是一個非常重要的訊息。

And that can also reassure European governments or Western governments, governments around the world, frankly, in how, you know, the idea that the Supreme Court says that he exceeded his authority, it's a big deal.

這也能讓歐洲各國政府或西方各國政府，坦白說，全世界的政府都感到安心，你知道的，最高法院說他越權了，這是一件大事。

So I think it's going to change trade deals.

所以我認為這將會改變貿易協議。

I think you're going to see a lot more bilateral trade deals happening.

我認為你會看到更多雙邊貿易協議的出現。

For example, maybe the wto, the World Trade Organization, although I think that's been, that's really been sidelined for so long now.

例如，也許世界貿易組織，雖然我認為它已經被邊緣化很久了。

It'll be interesting to see whether it can come back.

看看它是否能重拾影響力將會很有趣。

But there's, there's, it's going to have massive repercussions.

但是，這將會產生巨大的連鎖反應。

I can imagine that many consumers in the United States will also be wondering, you know, how is this going to affect me directly because many have been screaming about prices rising.

我可以想像，美國的許多消費者也會想知道，這將如何直接影響我，因為很多人一直在抱怨物價上漲。

Do you think this could have an impact on consumer prices in the U.S. i think so.

你認為這會對美國的消費者物價產生影響嗎？我認為會。

I mean, the Federal Reserve bank of New York said that US firms and consumers had bore the bulk at roughly 90% of the economic burden of tariffs imposed in 2025.

我的意思是，紐約聯邦準備銀行表示，美國公司和消費者承擔了 2025 年關稅所造成的經濟負擔中的絕大部分，約 90%。

So it should help them in that and it should be managed to bring, bring down things and, you know, it'll be good for consumers.

所以這應該能幫助他們，也能有效降低物價，對消費者來說是好事。

Clifford Koonin from DW Business, thank you.

謝謝 DW Business 的 Clifford Koonin。