发布于 2026年2月20日，美国东部时间下午5:45 / 来源：CNN政治
唐纳德·特朗普总统数月来为最高法院关于其广泛关税权力裁决的准备工作，在判决最终出炉时几乎无法抑制他的愤怒。
“我为法院的某些成员感到羞耻，绝对为他们没有勇气为国家做正确的事情而感到羞耻，”他周五在白宫简报室仓促组织的45分钟露面中怒不可遏地表示。
“现在将使用其他替代方案来取代法院错误驳回的那些（措施）。”
特朗普在对其广泛紧急关税的废除感到愤怒的同时，也坚持认为他对其青睐的经济工具的野心不会因此受挫，他一度声称美国将因此“更强大”，尽管他承认自己“深感失望”。
白宫现在计划根据另一项法律授权，对所有商品全面征收10%的新关税，期限长达五个月——除非国会延长——这为特朗普争取了时间，以制定新的贸易战计划，该计划已使其国内外议程充满争议。
相关文章 美国最高法院周五倒映在水洼中。Heather Diehl/Getty Images 要点：最高法院顶住唐纳德·特朗普的紧急关税压力 阅读时间11分钟
“这个过程有点复杂，需要更多时间，”他说。“但最终结果会让我们获得更多资金。”
但这一表态掩盖了白宫面临的政治影响，其助手们正准备下周的国情咨文演讲，旨在吹嘘国家在即将到来的中期选举前取得的进展。
据知情人士透露，特朗普在早餐会议上的州餐厅收到通知，告知他判决结果，随后他在讲话中抨击这是“耻辱”，并提前结束了活动。几小时内，他安排向公众发表讲话，一个月来首次重返简报室。
特朗普议程的新疑问
总统在明显的法律拒绝面前表现出的反抗，标志着企业和消费者面临新的财政不确定性时代的开始，这些群体已经因特朗普决心以前所未有的规模实施关税而感到不安。
特朗普对紧急贸易权力的激进使用重塑了国际供应链和全球联盟，往往在几分钟内就完成，使他能够利用高额关税威胁作为杠杆，向外国领导人施压以满足其要求。
这一局面现在可能面临瓦解，未来走向尚不明朗。
最高法院没有为政府如何偿还从公司收取的数十亿美元退款提供指导，这些公司现在正竞相寻求赔偿，创造了一个特朗普助手和贸易专家都简洁地描述为“一团糟”的经济局面。
周五，特朗普拒绝承诺偿还这笔钱，他此前曾表示这笔钱可用于资助各种新举措，包括向美国人发放2000美元“关税红利”。总统反而暗示此事将陷入数年的法律纠纷。
这一裁决还对特朗普外交政策核心的支柱提出了质疑，引发了新的疑问：盟友和对手是否会突然更有底气在国际舞台上挑战美国。
“这对总统是巨大打击，确实剥夺了他的一个主要外交政策工具，”右翼美国企业研究所经济政策研究主任迈克尔·斯特林说。“最高法院的这一明确表态表明，政府在贸易政策问题上明显且重大地越权。”
特朗普在法院裁决前更尖锐地描述了这一问题，称其关税制度的存亡一度是“生死攸关”的问题，并警告称其失效“将真的摧毁”国家。他经常将关税威胁归功于促使美国新投资和提高美国竞争力的关键因素，尽管两党经济专家都反驳称，关税的主要后果是提高美国人的价格。
“没有关税，这个国家现在会陷入困境，”他周四在佐治亚州一家钢铁厂的演讲中表示。“很遗憾我必须为此辩护，因为这只是常识。”
周五，特朗普的语气有所不同，试图淡化挫折的严重性。他声称政府计划使用的替代杠杆将更强大，甚至可能对全球外国商品和材料征收更高的税费。
“我将采取不同的方向，可能是我第一次就应该采取的方向，”特朗普说。“事实上，我可以收取比之前更高的费用。”
然而，事实上，法院裁决的政治影响立即在白宫引发震荡，特朗普长期以来一直认为广泛的关税权力是其经济和外交政策成功的关键。
副总统JD·万斯和几位内阁官员也批评了这一裁决以及最高法院本身，尽管最高法院有明显的保守派多数，而且特朗普任命了两名投票反对其关税权力的大法官。
“这是法院的无法无天，简单明了，”万斯在X平台上写道。“其唯一影响将是使总统更难保护美国产业和供应链韧性。”
替代关税方案
在政府内部，官员们数月来一直在策划潜在结果和备用方案，特朗普现在预计将利用这些方案。周五宣布的10%全球关税将通过允许政府在150天内设定不超过15%的税率的途径实施。
官员们可能援引的其他现有权力将允许特朗普重建许多刚刚被推翻的关税，但这需要更缓慢的流程，比单一的“一笔勾销”需要更多的程序。
“这些关税不会消失，”前特朗普贸易官员埃弗雷特·艾森斯塔特表示。“但最大的影响是无法利用快速关税来推动地缘政治和外交政策问题。”
据知情人士透露，官员们曾考虑过一项更激进的策略，即收取“许可费”而非关税，以保留特朗普随意征收关税的权力。但尽管总统周五承认他正在“考虑使用它”，但该策略被视为高风险，可能导致另一轮法律挑战。
周五，特朗普及其助手明确表示，有一个方案不在考虑范围内：完全退出贸易战，尽管经济学家甚至共和党盟友不断警告，关税已推高物价并加剧了党内在中期选举前面临的可负担性危机。
相反，特朗普表示，他只计划在周二的全国演讲前加倍实施其政策，这将是他迄今为止向持怀疑态度的美国人推销其经济计划的最引人注目的机会。
至于六位裁定对他不利的最高法院大法官，他们可能会坐在周二演讲的前排，但“几乎不会被邀请，”特朗普说。“老实说，我根本不在乎他们是否来。”
CNN的凯特兰·柯林斯、克里斯汀·霍姆斯、凯文·利普塔克和莎拉·费里斯对本报道有贡献。
A defiant Trump vows new tariffs while fuming at Supreme Court
Published Feb 20, 2026, 5:45 PM ET / Source: CNN Politics
President Donald Trump’s months of preparation for a Supreme Court ruling on his sweeping tariff powers did little to contain his rage when the verdict finally came.
“I’m ashamed of certain members of the court, absolutely ashamed for not having the courage to do what’s right for the country,” he fumed from the White House briefing room on Friday in a hastily organized 45-minute appearance.
“Other alternatives will now be used to replace the ones the that the court incorrectly rejected.”
Trump swung between indignation over the elimination of his broad emergency tariffs and insistence that his ambitions for his favored economic tool would not be derailed, claiming at one point the US would emerge “stronger for it” even as he confessed to being “deeply disappointed.”
The White House now plans to impose a new 10% across-the-board tariff for as long as five months — unless extended by Congress — under a separate legal authority, buying Trump time to draw up a new gameplan for waging the trade war that has animated his agenda both at home and abroad.
Related article The US Supreme Court is reflected in a puddle on Friday. Heather Diehl/Getty Images Takeaways: Supreme Court stands up to Donald Trump on emergency tariffs 11 min read
“It’s a little more complicated, the process takes a little more time,” he said. “But the end result is going to get us more money.”
But that message belied the political repercussions for the White House, where aides were in the midst of preparations for a State of the Union speech next week meant to tout the nation’s progress ahead of the looming midterm elections.
Trump was in the State Dining Room at a breakfast meeting with governors when he received a note informing him of the ruling, which he blasted as “a disgrace” before ending the event early, according to people familiar with his remarks. Within hours, he had arranged to address the public, returning to the briefing room for the first time in a month.
Fresh questions about Trump’s agenda
The president’s defiance in the face of stark legal rejection marked the start of a new era of financial uncertainty for companies and consumers already thrown off-kilter by his determination to impose tariffs at unprecedented scale.
Trump’s aggressive use of emergency trade authorities reshaped international supply chains and global alliances, often in a matter of minutes, and allowed him to wield the threat of hefty tariffs as leverage to pressure foreign leaders into fulfilling his demands.
That now threatens to unravel, with little clarity about what comes next.
The Supreme Court did not offer directions for how the government should pay back the billions of dollars in refunds collected from companies that are now racing to seek restitution, creating an economic scenario that Trump aides and trade experts alike have succinctly described as “a mess.”
Trump on Friday declined to commit to paying back the money, which he had previously suggested could be used to fund a variety of new initiatives, including sending Americans $2,000 “tariff dividends.” The president instead suggested the matter would get tied up in years of legal fights.
The ruling also threw into doubt the central plank of Trump’s approach to foreign policy, raising fresh questions about whether allies and adversaries alike will suddenly feel more emboldened to challenge the United States on the world stage.
“It’s a huge blow to the president, and it does take away a major foreign policy tool,” said Michael Strain, director of economic policy studies at the right-leaning American Enterprise Institute. “This is a very decisive statement by the Supreme Court that, on the issue of trade policy, the administration clearly and dramatically exceeded its authority.”
Trump had described the stakes more starkly in the lead-up to the court’s verdict, saying the survival of his tariff regime at one point was a matter of “LIFE OR DEATH” and warning that its invalidation “would literally destroy” the country. He has frequently credited the threat of tariffs for compelling new investment in the US and improving American competitiveness, despite pushback from economic experts on both sides of the aisle who argue the chief consequence of tariffs is higher prices for Americans.
“Without tariffs, this country would be in such trouble right now,” he said Thursday during a speech at a Georgia steel plant. “It’s a shame that I have to justify this, because it’s just common sense.”
On Friday, Trump struck a somewhat different tone, seeking to downplay the size of the setback. He claimed the alternative levers his administration planned to use for tariffs would be more formidable and possibly even result in higher levies on foreign goods and materials around the globe.
“I’m going to go in a different direction, probably the direction that I should’ve gone the first time,” Trump said. “In fact, I can charge much more than I was charging.”
In reality, though, the political import of the court decision immediately reverberated through the White House, where Trump has long maintained that the wide-ranging tariff powers are key to his economic and foreign policy success.
Vice President JD Vance and several Cabinet officials also criticized the ruling and the Supreme Court itself, despite the high court’s clear conservative majority and the fact Trump picked two of the justices who voted against his tariffs authority.
“This is lawlessness from the Court, plain and simple,” Vance wrote on X. “And its only effect will be to make it harder for the president to protect American industries and supply chain resiliency.”
Alternative tariff options
Inside the administration, officials had spent months gaming out potential outcomes and planning the fallback options that Trump is now expected to utilize. The 10% global tariff announced Friday will be carried out through a pathway that allows the administration to set duties that don’t exceed 15% for up to 150 days.
Other existing authorities that officials are likely to invoke would allow Trump to reconstruct many of the tariffs that were just struck down — but at a far slower pace requiring more procedure than the single stroke of a pen.
“They’re not going away,” said Everett Eissenstat, a former Trump trade official. “But the biggest impact is the inability to use rapid tariffs to drive geopolitical and foreign policy issues.”
At one point, officials had considered a more aggressive maneuver that would rely on charging “licensing” fees instead of tariffs, preserving Trump’s ability to impose them at will, people familiar with the discussions said. But though the president acknowledged Friday he was “thinking about using it,” the approach is viewed as highly risky and likely to result in yet another legal challenge.
One option that Trump and his aides made clear Friday is not on the table: Retreating from their trade war altogether, despite constant warnings from economists and even GOP allies that the tariffs have pushed up prices and worsened the affordability crisis weighing on the party ahead of the midterms.
Trump instead indicated he’s only planning to double down on his approach ahead of his national address on Tuesday that will serve as his highest-profile opportunity yet to sell skeptical Americans on his economic plan.
As for the six Supreme Court justices who ruled against him and will likely be in the front row for that speech, “they’re barely invited,” Trump said. “Honestly, I couldn’t care less if they come.”
CNN’s Kaitlan Collins, Kristen Holmes, Kevin Liptak and Sarah Ferris contributed to this report.
