最大的“支柱”被折断，特朗普政府的下一步怎么走？

Group 1 - The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the global tariffs imposed by the Trump administration under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) lack legal basis, rendering most tariffs invalid [2][22] - This ruling significantly impacts Trump's economic agenda, particularly his tariff policy, which was a key component of his administration's trade strategy [12][31] - The decision forces the White House to shift from aggressive administrative measures to more traditional and procedural trade paths, which are slower and more susceptible to litigation [2][22] Group 2 - The ruling clarifies that the IEEPA, originally intended for sanctions, cannot be used as a "universal key" for imposing global tariffs [25][26] - The majority opinion emphasized that the Constitution assigns the power to levy taxes, including tariffs, to Congress, and any delegation of this power must be explicit [26][28] - The court's decision is seen as a limitation on presidential power, indicating that significant economic policies affecting the national economy cannot be enacted through vague legal provisions [33][34] Group 3 - Following the ruling, Trump announced plans to impose a new 10% global tariff using a different legal framework, the Trade Act of 1974, which has specific time and procedural limitations [35][36] - The administration is expected to rely more on established trade tools like Section 232 and Section 301 to impose tariffs, which, while legally clearer, involve more complex procedures [35][36] - The ruling may lead to new investigations and potential trade conflicts as the administration seeks to maintain pressure on trade partners [38]