00989B台新美國非投等債（本基金之配息來源可能為收益平準金且無保證收益及配息）

用心挑選票息6.5%以上美國企業債

採月配息機制，讓你掌握收益機會

投資一定有風險，基金投資有賺有賠，申購前應詳閱公開說明書。台新投信行銷資訊

—— 以上為 KKBOX 與 Firstory Podcast 廣告 ——

-----------------------------------
🎧 通勤學英語 VIP 專區 & 🚀 線上課程
-----------------------------------
💡 想要更自然的提升英語力？加入VIP會員，獲得專屬內容與優惠！

立即加入VIP方案 → https://15minstoday.firstory.io/join
VIP訂閱常見問題 →https://15minsengcafe.pse.is/5cjptb

🔥 社會人核心英語有聲書課程→https://15minsengcafe.pse.is/554esm

-------------------------------
🌎 15Mins.Today 相關連結
-------------------------------
💬 你的想法很重要！留言分享 → 留言連結

Web：www.15mins.today
YouTube：https://15minsengcafe.pse.is/3rhuuy
商業合作/贊助來信：15minstoday@gmail.com
意見回覆 : ask15mins@gmail.com

--------------------------------------------
📜 單集逐字稿 & 內容摘要（播放器字數有限，完整逐字稿請到官網查看）
--------------------------------------------

國際時事跟讀 Ep. L156: Trump's Ultimate Legal Battle Over Global Tariffs

Highlights 主題摘要

The Supreme Court struck down Trump's emergency tariffs, prompting a rapid shift in his legal strategy.
The administration invoked a rare provision in the Trade Act of 1974 to bypass legislative restrictions.
Legal scholars warn this statutory maneuvering directly challenges the constitutional separation of powers regarding national taxation.

Shortly after the Supreme Court definitively struck down his flagship trade policy, President Donald Trump aggressively retaliated by pivoting to a new legal strategy, announcing a sweeping fifteen percent tariff on global imports. The high court ruled that Trump unconstitutionally bypassed Congress when he previously imposed border taxes using an unprecedented emergency mandate. Infuriated by this legal defeat, the president utilized a different statutory framework to introduce a blanket ten percent levy on Friday, which he suddenly escalated to fifteen percent over the weekend.

就在美國最高法院正式推翻其具指標性的貿易政策後不久，總統川普隨即採取強硬姿態報復，轉向新的法律策略，宣布對全球進口商品徵收高達百分之十五的全面性關稅。最高法院裁定，川普先前利用史無前例的緊急授權來實施邊境稅，已屬違憲繞過國會的行為。面對這場法律挫敗，川普大為震怒，於週五改採一套截然不同的法源依據，祭出百分之十的全面性關稅，隨後更在週末突襲式地將稅率調升至百分之十五。

To circumvent the recent judicial restriction, the administration formally invoked Section 122 of the Trade Act of 1974. This rarely utilized provision explicitly permits the president to unilaterally implement import restrictions, including tariffs up to fifteen percent, specifically to combat severe national trade deficits. However, this statutory executive authority is strictly limited to one hundred and fifty days unless Congress officially approves an extension. Trump confidently argued this legally tested maneuver provides the executive branch with sufficient power to act decisively.

為了規避近期的司法限制，美國政府正式動用《一九七四年貿易法》的第一二二條。這項罕見的法律條文明文允許總統為對抗嚴重的國家貿易逆差，單方面實施包含高達百分之十五關稅在內的進口限制。然而，這項法定的行政權力有嚴格的時間限制，除非獲得國會正式批准展延，否則僅能實施一百五十天。川普充滿信心地主張，這項經過法律考驗的策略，能為行政部門提供果斷行事的充分權限。

The core of this escalating dispute centers entirely on the constitutional separation of powers regarding taxation. Following the Supreme Court ruling, numerous organizations immediately filed massive lawsuits demanding billions of dollars in refunds for the previously collected exorbitant and unlawful tariffs. Legal scholars emphasize that the US Constitution explicitly grants Congress the exclusive power to lay and collect taxes. By continually seeking obscure statutory loopholes to impose these controversial unilateral duties, the current administration is aggressively challenging the established boundaries of presidential authority and legislative oversight.

這場不斷升溫的爭端，其核心完全圍繞在憲法對課稅權的「權力分立」原則。在最高法院做出裁決後，許多機構立即提起大規模的集體訴訟，要求當局退還先前違法徵收、高達數十億美元的高昂關稅。法界學者強調，《美國憲法》明定國會擁有制定與徵收稅款的專屬權力。現任政府不斷尋找冷僻的法規漏洞以實施這些具爭議的單方面關稅，此舉正積極挑戰總統職權與立法監督的既有界線。

As the administration vigorously defends its tariff agenda in federal courts, the long-term implications for constitutional law remain highly uncertain. The central legal question is whether the president can continuously repurpose emergency powers and outdated trade statutes to bypass legislative approval. With the statutory deadline rapidly approaching, this intense legal showdown is essentially guaranteeing a historic constitutional crisis and unparalleled economic turbulence. Ultimately, this relentless regulatory warfare highlights a profound institutional struggle over the fundamental limits of executive power in modern American governance.

隨著當局在聯邦法院極力捍衛其關稅政策，這項舉動對憲政法理的長期影響仍充滿高度不確定性。核心的法律爭議在於：總統是否能不斷重新挪用緊急權力與過時的貿易法規，藉此繞過立法機關的批准。隨著法定期限（一百五十天）迅速逼近，這場激烈的法律攻防幾乎注定將引發一場歷史性的憲政危機，以及史無前例的經濟動盪。歸根究柢，這場無休止的法規戰，凸顯了現代美國政府體制中，關於行政權基本界限的深刻制度性角力。

Keyword Drills 關鍵字

Retaliate [verb, to perform an action in return for a perceived injury or wrong]: President Donald Trump aggressively retaliated by announcing a sweeping tariff.
Circumvent [verb, to find a way around an obstacle or legal restriction]: The administration invoked the act to circumvent the recent judicial restriction.
Unilaterally [adverb, in a way that involves doing something without the agreement of others]: This legal provision explicitly permits the president to unilaterally implement import restrictions.
Exorbitant [adjective, describing a price or amount that is unreasonably high]: Economists warn that these exorbitant import costs will simply be passed down to everyday citizens.
Turbulence [noun, a state of confusion, violence, or disorder]: Global markets eagerly brace for unparalleled economic turbulence.

Reference article:
1. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2026/2/22/trump-to-raise-us-global-tariff-from-ten-to-fifteen-percent-after-supreme-court-ruling
2. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c8r1e327z46o