2026年1月22日 下午2:32 UTC / 路透社
华盛顿，1月22日（路透社）- 美国最高法院大法官在审理唐纳德·特朗普总统试图解雇美联储理事莉萨·库克的案件时，似乎认同这样一种观点：美联储制定货币政策的独立性必须得到维护，而削弱这种独立性将带来现实的经济风险。
大法官们在周三的庭审中指出，如果法院的判决过程存在潜在危害，那就是会为现任及未来的总统打开一扇过宽的大门，使他们能够罢免货币政策制定者，从而破坏一个多世纪以来央行独立决策利率、不受政治压力干扰的传统。
《Breakingviews周刊》提供路透社全球金融评论团队的见解和观点。点击此处订阅。
广告 · 滚动继续阅读
保守派大法官布雷特·卡瓦诺在与负责辩护的副检察长D.约翰·绍尔（D. John Sauer）交流时，最直接地概括了这种担忧。绍尔被指派为特朗普辩护，理由是特朗普应被允许因库克在被任命为美联储理事前提交抵押贷款申请时涉嫌误报而将其解雇。
“你的立场是，不存在司法审查、无需任何程序、没有任何救济途径，仅由总统单方面决定‘理由’——我的意思是，这将削弱，甚至彻底摧毁美联储的独立性，”卡瓦诺说道。
“我们必须意识到我们的判决对政府结构的影响和后果，”卡瓦诺对绍尔表示。
卡瓦诺还指出，轻易允许罢免美联储理事会让总统产生“搜寻并摧毁”的动机，“找个借口，写在纸上——无需司法审查，无需任何程序，完事”。
特朗普持续施压美联储降息
本案的背景是特朗普持续要求美联储在当前主席杰罗姆·鲍威尔领导下更快更深地降息，尽管通胀尚未消退。特朗普已表示，他计划在5月鲍威尔任期届满时任命一位志同道合的新美联储主席。
特朗普以未经证实的抵押贷款欺诈指控为由解雇库克，而库克于2022年由民主党前总统乔·拜登任命，任期至2038年。库克称这一指控是为了因货币政策分歧将其罢免的借口。
本月，特朗普的司法部对鲍威尔展开刑事调查，涉及其在华盛顿美联储总部翻新两座历史建筑的项目。鲍威尔同样指出，此次调查是特朗普为加强对美联储和货币政策影响力的借口。
特朗普的司法团队回应：8月特朗普宣布解雇库克后，股市上涨的事实削弱了悲观预测。
大法官艾米·科尼·巴雷特（与卡瓦诺一样由特朗普任命）追问绍尔，允许解雇库克的经济后果。巴雷特指出，经济学家已向法院提交简报称，这可能引发衰退。
“在这种案件中，我们应如何考虑公众利益？”巴雷特问道。
“我不想从事预测市场走势的工作，”巴雷特打断道，“我不想对量化风险负责。我是法官，不是经济学家。但如果存在风险，是否应该……我们是否需要谨慎行事？”
长期经济影响
经济学家认为，这是一个公认的原则：不受短期政治压力干扰的央行能做出更优的长期经济决策，即使需以高利率抑制通胀（可能放缓经济增长、推高失业率，给寻求连任的政客带来不便）。
特朗普自12个月前重返白宫以来，一直采取扩张性的总统权力观。在库克案中，大法官们需权衡美联储独立性的价值，与特朗普政府的论点（即总统利益——进而公众利益——因留任他想解雇的联邦机构官员而受损）的矛盾。
过去一年，最高法院在多起紧急案件中支持特朗普，包括允许他在法律挑战期间暂时罢免联邦机构官员。
但美联储作为美国和全球金融体系核心的地位，以及总统通常不直接决定货币政策的事实，使库克案具有特殊性。
“留任她不会阻碍他管理部门的权力——因为他根本没有这种权力，”自由派大法官索尼娅·索托马约尔表示。
此前阻止特朗普立即解雇库克的法官裁定，其未提前通知或听证的解雇行为可能违反宪法第五修正案规定的正当程序权利。最高法院正在考虑特朗普政府要求推翻该法官裁决的请求，同时库克对解雇的法律挑战仍在继续。
“我们知道机构独立性非常重要，如果我们过于仓促且未经充分考虑就判决，将损害这种独立性，”索托马约尔补充道。
索托马约尔认为，让下级法院全面审查所有问题，“最符合公众和国际社会对正当法律程序的信心”。
“我们为何不等到案件终结，所有问题清晰后再做最终裁决——她是否本应被解雇？”索托马约尔问道。
最高法院预计在6月底前作出裁决，也可能提前。
报道：Howard Schneider；编辑：Dan Burns和Will Dunham
（配图说明：2026年1月21日，美国华盛顿，美联储理事莉萨·库克在律师Abbe Lowell陪同下，在美国最高法院外等候庭审。最高法院正在审理特朗普试图解雇她的案件。路透社/ Nathan Howard [购买授权，新标签打开]）
US Supreme Court sees risk in Trump running roughshod over Fed
January 22, 2026 2:32 PM UTC / Reuters
WASHINGTON, Jan 22 (Reuters) – U.S. Supreme Court justices during arguments over President Donald Trump’s bid to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook seemed to embrace the idea that the central bank’s independence to set monetary policy must be preserved and that eroding it would present real-world economic risks.
If there was possible harm in how the court proceeds, the justices suggested during the arguments on Wednesday, it would be in leaving the door open too wide for presidents – now or in the future – to remove monetary policymakers and in doing so disrupt more than a century of letting central bankers make judgments about interest rates free of political pressure.
The Week in Breakingviews newsletter offers insights and ideas from Reuters’ global financial commentary team. Sign up here.
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
That concern was summarized most directly by conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh during an exchange with Solicitor General D. John Sauer, tasked with arguing why Trump should be allowed to remove Cook over alleged misstatements made on mortgage applications before she was appointed to the Fed.
“Your position that there’s no judicial review, no process required, no remedy available, a very low bar for cause that the president alone determines – I mean, that would weaken, if not shatter, the independence of the Federal Reserve,” Kavanaugh said.
“We have to be aware of what we’re doing and the consequences of your position for the structure of the government,” Kavanaugh told Sauer.
Advertisement · Scroll to continue
Making the removal of a Fed governor too easy gives the president an incentive for a search-and-destroy mission to “find something and just put that on a piece of paper – no judicial review, no process, nothing. You’re done,” Kavanaugh said.
TRUMP’S PERSISTENT DEMANDS
Looming over the case are Trump’s persistent demands that the Fed cut interest rates faster and further than the central bank under the leadership of current Chair Jerome Powell has been willing to do in the face of lingering inflation. Trump has stated that he plans to install a like-minded new Fed chair when Powell’s term in the post expires in May.
Trump cited the unproven allegations of mortgage fraud as justification for firing Cook, who was appointed as a Fed governor in 2022 by Democratic former President Joe Biden with a term running until 2038. Cook has called this allegation a pretext to oust her over monetary policy differences.
Trump’s Justice Department this month launched a criminal investigation against Powell concerning a project to renovate two historical buildings at the Fed headquarters in Washington. Powell similarly has called this investigation a pretext for Trump to gain more influence over the Fed and monetary policy.
Justice Amy Coney Barrett, who like Kavanaugh was appointed to the Supreme Court by Trump, pressed Sauer on the economic consequences of allowing Cook’s removal to stand. Barrett noted that economists had filed briefs with the court saying doing so could trigger a recession.
“How should we think about the public interest in a case like this?” Barrett asked.
Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, accompanied by lawyer Abbe Lowell, looks on outside the U.S. Supreme Court, as Supreme Court justices consider U.S. President Donald Trump’s effort to fire her, in Washington, D.C., U.S., January 21, 2026. REUTERS/Nathan Howard [Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab]
Sauer responded by saying the stock market’s rise after Trump announced his firing of Cook in August undercut predictions of doom.
“Well, I’ll interrupt you there to say that I don’t want to be in the business of predicting exactly what the market’s going to do,” Barrett said. “I don’t want to be responsible for quantifying that risk. I’m a judge, not an economist. But if there is a risk, doesn’t that counsel … caution on our part?”
LONG-TERM OUTCOMES
Economists regard it as a well-established principle that central banks that operate free from short-term political pressure make decisions producing better long-term economic outcomes, tempering inflation even if it means high interest rates that can slow economic growth, raise unemployment and make life uncomfortable for politicians seeking reelection.
Trump has taken an expansive view of presidential powers since returning to office 12 months ago. The justices in the Cook case are weighing the value of Fed independence against the Trump administration’s arguments that it is the president’s interests – and by extension the public’s – that would be damaged by leaving federal agency officials in place who he wants removed.
The Supreme Court has backed Trump in numerous cases over the past year decided on an emergency basis, including allowing him to remove various officials from federal agencies while their legal challenges to his actions play out.
But the Fed’s role as central to the U.S. and global financial system, as well as the fact that presidents as a matter of course do not directly decide monetary policy, put the Cook case on a somewhat different footing.
“It’s not as if keeping her is going to thwart any right he has to run the department – because he has none,” liberal Justice Sonia Sotomayor said.
The judge who blocked Trump from immediately firing Cook said that his action without notice or a hearing likely violated her right to due process under the U.S. Constitution’s Fifth Amendment. The Supreme Court is considering the Trump administration’s request to lift that judge’s order while Cook’s legal challenge to the president’s action continues to play out.
“We know that the independence of the agency is very important, and that that independence is harmed if we decide these issues too quickly and with not due consideration,” Sotomayor added.
Allowing the lower courts to thoroughly examine all the issues, Sotomayor said, makes “the most sense to the public’s confidence and to the world’s confidence about the due process of law.”
“Why shouldn’t we wait until the end of this case, where all the issues are clear and where we make a final decision as to whether she should have been removed or not?” Sotomayor asked.
A Supreme Court ruling is expected by the end of June but could come sooner.
Reporting by Howard Schneider; Editing by Dan Burns and Will Dunham
发表回复