田飞龙：“特朗普关税”被判违宪，美国国法能关住这个“怪兽”吗？

Core Viewpoint - The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling on February 20, 2026, declared Trump's tariff measures unconstitutional, marking a significant constitutional defeat for his trade war strategy and reinforcing the checks and balances of the U.S. government [1]. Group 1: Legal and Constitutional Implications - The ruling emphasizes the role of the judiciary in maintaining the balance of power, reaffirming Congress's constitutional authority over tariffs and foreign policy, and imposing constraints on presidential power [1][7]. - Trump's reliance on the International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to justify his tariffs has been challenged, with critics arguing that it does not grant him broad authority for such measures [4][10]. - The Supreme Court's decision reflects its independence from political influence, as it did not yield to Trump's expectations despite his appointments of several justices [5][10]. Group 2: Political and Economic Consequences - The ruling is expected to impact Trump's political agenda and may force his administration to redesign its legal basis for tariffs, complicating existing trade agreements and refund processes [7][9]. - Trump's immediate response included announcing a new 10% global tariff under the Trade Act of 1974, indicating a shift in legal strategy to circumvent the Supreme Court's ruling [4][10]. - The ongoing legal battles between the Trump administration and the judiciary are likely to continue, potentially leading to further political and legal confrontations [10][11]. Group 3: Broader Context and Future Outlook - The ruling has implications for Trump's negotiations with China and the upcoming midterm elections, potentially undermining his political capital [9][12]. - The article suggests that the resilience of the U.S. constitutional framework will be tested as Trump may resort to radical measures in response to judicial constraints [10][12]. - The outcome of this constitutional struggle will determine whether Trump is viewed as a protector of American interests or a threat to democratic norms and international order [12].