最高法院的关税裁决并不能解决问题

Group 1 - The Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that the President's imposition of high tariffs in 2025 exceeded his authority, as the International Emergency Economic Powers Act did not explicitly grant such powers [1] - The ruling does not address whether the White House can use other legal means to impose tariffs or continue to justify broad administrative measures under a state of emergency [1] - The President plans to impose a new 15% global tariff under Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974 and initiate investigations to potentially levy more taxes, leaving the future uncertain [1] Group 2 - The government's already questionable fiscal budget has collapsed, with an anticipated annual tariff revenue of over $250 billion, while the budget deficit, currently exceeding 5% of GDP, may continue to grow [2] - If tariff revenue is cut off, it could create a significant fiscal gap, making it difficult to compensate even with the broadest alternative authorizations [2] - The government's defeat on tariffs could escalate into a genuine fiscal crisis, economic downturn, and constitutional crisis [2] Group 3 - The government should soften its trade policies, seek new agreements with trade partners, and abandon further tariff threats to restore fiscal control [3] - Collaboration with Congress is essential to establish orderly spending discipline, broad revenue growth, and a bipartisan-supported future deficit target [3] - The government should restrain its anger towards the Supreme Court for rejecting its signature policy [3]