Workflow
下一个“黑天鹅”会是11月5日吗?
Hua Er Jie Jian Wen·2025-10-04 10:39

Core Viewpoint - The upcoming Supreme Court hearing on November 5 regarding the legality of tariffs imposed by the Trump administration could significantly reshape presidential power and economic policy in the U.S. [1] Group 1: Legal Basis and Implications - The core of the judicial confrontation revolves around the Trump administration's invocation of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) from 1977, which grants the president broad powers in response to a "national emergency" [2] - The tariffs implemented on April 2 have raised the effective tariff rate on consumer goods in the U.S. to 17.9%, the highest level since 1934 [2] Group 2: Government's Position - The White House expresses confidence in the legality of the tariffs, with trade advisor Peter Navarro providing three main arguments: trade deficits represent an "unusual and extraordinary" external threat, the IEEPA does not explicitly exclude tariffs as a "emergency" tool, and these tariffs will undergo periodic congressional review [3] Group 3: Legal Community's Perspective - The mainstream legal opinion, including many conservative scholars, argues that the government's legal basis is weak, with a high likelihood of losing the case, primarily based on the "major-questions doctrine" which requires explicit congressional or constitutional authorization for significant economic and political actions [4][5] Group 4: Market Reactions and Economic Consequences - The outcome of the Supreme Court case is viewed as a "Damocles sword" over Wall Street, with potential for two drastically different futures depending on the ruling [6] - If the tariffs are deemed illegal, the White House may need to refund billions in tariffs, impacting fiscal policy, and the unilateral economic strategy of the Trump administration could be fundamentally undermined [7] - Conversely, a ruling in favor of the Trump administration would greatly expand presidential power, allowing for unilateral economic decisions without congressional approval, potentially leading to market volatility if negative economic indicators coincide with a loss [9]