“对等关税”合法还是越权？美国最高法院开审

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. Supreme Court is hearing arguments regarding the legality of the Trump administration's comprehensive tariff policy, with concerns raised about potential abuse of executive power and the implications for trade negotiations and national security [1][5][7]. Group 1: Legal Proceedings - The case traces back to April when President Trump invoked the International Emergency Economic Powers Act to impose "reciprocal tariffs," leading to appeals from a liquor importer and a toy company questioning the legality of such actions [1][3]. - The liquor importer case successfully progressed through the U.S. International Trade Court and the Federal Circuit Court of Appeals, prompting the federal government to appeal to the Supreme Court, which accepted the case on September 9 [3]. Group 2: Constitutional and Legal Implications - According to the U.S. Constitution, the power to levy taxes belongs to Congress, while the International Emergency Economic Powers Act allows the president to take economic measures in response to foreign threats, but does not explicitly grant the authority to impose tariffs [5]. - The legality of deriving the authority to impose tariffs from the regulation of imports is a central question, raising concerns about whether this would transfer congressional taxing power to the president [7]. Group 3: Potential Outcomes and Implications - There are three possible outcomes from the Supreme Court's decision: 1. Upholding the legality of the tariff policy, which could increase global trade uncertainty and disrupt the value chain established in the early 21st century [11]. 2. Rejecting the tariff policy, allowing importers to seek refunds and potentially creating new opportunities in international trade [11]. 3. Allowing tariffs in certain scenarios but creating an unpredictable environment for traders, which could negatively impact investment, exports, and global economic prosperity [11].