【新闻趣摘】当特朗普把白宫变成"法律格斗场"：这位美国前总统兼现任"最高法院锦鲤"正在用官司改写总统权力教科书。从"封口费案"34项罪名全中，到如今让最高法院三连判为自己"镀金"——总统豁免权、竞选资格保卫战、削弱地方法院权力，特朗普用实际行动证明：打不过就换裁判！现在连法官们都在收死亡威胁和幽灵披萨（用已故法官儿子名义下单），而白宫政策顾问直接宣称美国活在"司法暴政"下。这场权力平衡木表演最精彩之处在于：当国会忙着通过"美丽大法案"时，总统已签下166项行政令，数量碾压拜登四年任期总和。（友情提示：本文可能引起法律系学生心悸，建议搭配宪法教科书服用）
---
**How Trump is using the courts to get what he wants - and changing the shape of presidential power**
**特朗普如何借司法系统得偿所愿——并重塑总统权力格局**
2 days ago Share Save Gary O'Donoghue Chief North America correspondent Share Save
【发布于2天前】BBC北美事务主编 加里·奥多诺霍
---
**BBC**
BBC
It was a warm, late May afternoon in 2024 in lower Manhattan. The jury in Donald Trump's trial over hush money paid by his former lawyer to adult film star Stormy Daniels was out deliberating for a second day. Assuming we were in for a long wait, I took myself off to lunch with the BBC team at the world-famous Katz's deli for a Reuben sandwich. Then all hell broke loose. The jury was returning. According to one rumour, they were just being sent home for the day; another suggested there was a verdict. Seconds before the BBC News at Ten went on air, I arrived breathless at the live television point outside the courthouse, smashing my phone screen on the pavement in my hurry. One by one, the verdicts filtered through: guilty... guilty... guilty... it went on.
2024年5月末一个温暖的午后，曼哈顿下城。陪审团对特朗普"封口费"案（其前律师向成人影星斯托米·丹尼尔斯支付封口费）的审议进入第二天。本以为还要漫长等待，我正与BBC团队在著名的卡茨熟食店享用鲁宾三明治，突然风云突变——陪审团要回来了。有传言说他们只是暂时休庭，也有消息称已达成裁决。在BBC十点新闻直播开始前几秒，我气喘吁吁冲到法院外的直播点，匆忙中把手机摔碎了屏幕。判决结果陆续传来：有罪...有罪...有罪...持续不断。
---
**Getty Images During his recent interview with Gary O'Donoghue, Donald Trump called judges who have suspended presidential executive orders"radical left lunatics"**
盖蒂图片社 特朗普近期接受采访时，将暂停总统行政令的法官称为"激进左翼疯子"
All 34 charges came back guilty, and I spent that night's main news bulletin explaining the enormity of the idea that a former president was now a convicted felon – a first in US history. As the BBC's senior North America correspondent, I'd spent months covering the multitude of Trump's legal problems in courts up and down the East Coast. Four separate criminal cases; several civil actions; it was coming at him from all sides, threatening not just his liberty but his whole political and commercial existence. Spool on a year, and the boot is thoroughly on the other foot. Three major Supreme Court judgments – one giving presidents and former presidents broad immunity from prosecution; a second dismissing the ruling that Trump's attempts to overturn the 2020 election results disqualified him from running for office again; and a third, just last month, curbing district judges' abilities to stall the president's agenda – have all emboldened this president who, having reshaped the Supreme Court with a solid conservative majority, now has the lower courts in his sights.
34项指控全部成立，当晚我在头条新闻中剖析"前总统成重罪犯"这一美国史上空前事件的重大意义。作为BBC资深北美记者，我耗时数月追踪特朗普在东海岸各法院的法律纠纷——四起刑事案件、多起民事诉讼从四面围攻，不仅威胁其自由，更危及他的政治与商业生命。然而一年后局势彻底逆转。最高法院三项关键裁决——授予现任及前任总统广泛起诉豁免权；推翻"试图推翻2020大选结果使其丧失竞选资格"的裁决；以及上月刚通过的限制地方法院搁置总统议程的权力——让这位已通过任命保守派大法官重塑最高法院的总统，开始将矛头指向下级法院。
---
**Reuters US Supreme Court justices at the Supreme Court in 2022**
路透社 2022年美国最高法院大法官合影
Those federal district judges – who had often made rulings on immigration policy that they said applied nationwide – are now facing a full-frontal onslaught from an administration that has questioned their legitimacy, and some say flouted their very authority. The question is, should they fight back to reassert their authority – and if so, how can they? And will this all permanently reshape the balance of powers in the US, even after Donald Trump's term ends?
那些曾对移民政策作出全国性裁决的联邦地方法官，如今正遭遇行政部门的正面攻击——政府质疑其合法性，甚至被指藐视司法权威。问题在于：法官们是否应反击以重申权威？若如此又该如何行动？这一切会永久改变美国权力平衡吗——即便在特朗普任期结束后？
---
**'The gravest assault on democracy'**
**"对民主最严重的攻击"**
Several judges – both active and retired – have told me that the scale of the"attack" is like nothing seen before. John E Jones III, a former judge in Pennsylvania, appointed by a Republican president, and now president of Dickinson College, said:"I think it's fair to say that in particular, the US district courts… [are] under attack by the administration in a way that is unprecedented." As well as his colourful remarks to me on the phone during our recent interview, the US President has variously called judges"crooked","monsters","deranged","lunatics","USA hating", and"radical left".
多位现任及退休法官向我表示，这种"攻击"规模前所未有。由共和党总统任命、现任迪金森学院院长的宾州前法官约翰·E·琼斯三世指出："可以说美国地方法院正遭受行政机构史无前例的打击。"特朗普总统在近期电话采访中不仅对我妙语连珠，还曾称法官为"腐败分子"、"怪物"、"疯子"、"恨国党"和"激进左翼"。
---
**Getty Images Deputy chief of staff for policy, Stephen Miller, has said that the country is living under a judicial tyranny**
盖蒂图片社 政策副幕僚长斯蒂芬·米勒宣称美国处于"司法暴政"下
He has also called for the impeachment of those he disagrees with. And there have been threats to sue judges too. His deputy chief of staff for policy, Stephen Miller, has been even more forthright, declaring that the country is living under a judicial tyranny."Each day, they change the foreign policy, economic, staffing, and national security policies of the administration," he posted on the social media site X in March."It is madness. It is lunacy. It is pure lawlessness."It is the gravest assault on democracy. It must and will end."
他不仅呼吁弹劾异见法官，甚至威胁提起诉讼。政策副幕僚长斯蒂芬·米勒更为直白，宣称美国处于"司法暴政"之下。三月他在社交媒体X发文："法官们每日更改我们的外交政策、经济政策、人事政策与国家安全政策，这简直是疯狂、荒谬、无法无天，是对民主最严重的攻击，必须也必将终结。"
---
**From death threats to doxxing**
**从死亡威胁到人肉搜索**
Judges have faced growing hostility, and in some cases threats of violence from the public."[They] are facing threats that they never have faced before," says Nancy Gertner, a former federal judge who now teaches at Harvard Law School. She was appointed by President Bill Clinton and spent 17 years on the federal bench in Massachusetts."There's no question that the kind of opprobrium that the administration heaps on judges with whom they disagree is unlike any other time." Judge Gertner says she knows of serving judges who have received death threats this year that are understood to have been prompted by their blocking or delaying some of the president's executive orders. There is no suggestion that Trump had any knowledge of the threats.
法官们正面临日益增长的敌意，甚至公众暴力威胁。曾任联邦法官17年、现哈佛法学院教授南希·格特纳表示："法官遭遇前所未有的威胁，行政部门对异见法官的诋毁程度空前。"她透露今年有多位在职法官因暂缓总统行政令收到死亡威胁，但无证据表明特朗普知晓这些威胁。
Figures compiled by the US Marshals Service, which is tasked with protecting the judiciary, show that, to mid-June, there were more than 400 threats against almost 300 judges – surpassing the totals for the entire year of 2022. Some of the threats involve doxxing – the publication of personal information about the person or their family, which risks opening them up to attack. Other forms of intimidation this year have been more sinister still. According to Esther Salas, a serving district judge in New Jersey, more than 100 judges have been subjected to fake pizza delivery orders. No big deal, you might think, but the deliveries are often accompanied with threats and in around 20 cases, the orders were placed by people who used the name Daniel Anderl, Judge Salas's late son. He was killed five years ago by a disgruntled lawyer from a case heard by his mother. The assailant, who also shot her husband, had posed as a pizza delivery man.
美国法警局数据显示，截至六月中旬已有近300名法官遭遇超400次威胁，超过2022年全年总和。部分威胁涉及曝光法官及家人隐私，更有甚者——新泽西地区法官埃斯特·萨拉斯透露，超100名法官收到虚假披萨外卖订单，其中约20单使用其已故儿子丹尼尔·安德尔的名字。五年前，一名败诉律师伪装成外卖员枪杀了她儿子并重伤其丈夫。
---
**Getty Images Esther Salas's home following the attack in July 2020 that killed her son**
盖蒂图片社 2020年7月萨拉斯法官遭袭后的住宅，其子在此事件中遇害
Judge Salas told me of her reaction to hearing what was going on:"To say that I was angry is an understatement. And then of course, to have come home and tell my husband who nearly [died]." The rise in threats began before the current administration but Judge Salas says we are in new territory now."We are inviting individuals to do us harm when inflammatory rhetoric [is used]," she claims."That is giving a green light to anyone who thinks they may need to take things into their own hands. And our leaders know that." Many supporters of the current administration including Jeff Anderson, one of the architects of the Project 2025 program (which many saw as a blueprint for Trump's second term), reject the idea that presidential rhetoric is to blame for raising the temperature.
萨拉斯法官谈及此事："说愤怒都太轻描淡写，回家告诉险些丧命的丈夫时..."虽然威胁增长始于现政府前，但她认为现在情况更严峻："煽动性言论是在鼓励暴力，等于向那些想自行其是者开绿灯。领导人们心知肚明。"包括"2025计划"设计者杰夫·安德森在内的政府支持者否认总统言论导致局势升温。
Mr Anderson argues that the left is more to blame for hostility towards judges:"The most high-profile threat to anyone on the federal courts was when someone tried to assassinate [the conservative] Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh."There's this tendency to try to characterise the Trump administration as being what has facilitated this. I think a lot of the more radical revolutionary notions that we need to take law in our own hands and the ends justify the means… tend to [be] from the left in America."
安德森称左翼更应担责："最引人注目的威胁是有人企图刺杀最高法院保守派大法官卡瓦诺。人们总想把责任推给特朗普政府，但那些'法律自主'的激进革命思想...往往来自美国左翼。"
---
**A blizzard of executive orders**
**行政令暴风雪**
While other presidents have clashed with the courts, Trump's confrontations are unquestionably unique in their scale and fury, and they were perhaps inevitable, given that he arrived in the White House with a blizzard of executive orders aimed at getting what he wanted quickly. On day one alone, 26 were signed. There have been another 140 to the beginning of July – more than President Joe Biden signed during his four-year term, and only around 100 fewer than President Barack Obama in his eight years in the White House.
虽然历任总统都与法院有过冲突，但特朗普对抗的规模与激烈程度无疑独一无二。这或许不可避免——他上任首日就签署26项行政令，截至七月初又签140项，超过拜登四年任期总和，与奥巴马八年任期仅差约100项。
Trump could have asked Congress to enact laws to implement these policies; after all, Republicans currently control both chambers. But that process takes time, and Congress has been preoccupied with the president's flagship domestic legislation – the so-called"Big Beautiful Bill" – meaning that there has been no time or political capital for other priorities. Of course, executive orders are perfectly within the president's prerogative. The power to make executive orders comes directly from Article II of the US Constitution, so Trump is not defying or bypassing the constitution – he's pulling the levers of government in a way he's allowed to do, provided the orders cite legislative authority; and those orders do have the force of law. What the president can't do, with the sweep of his pen, is make new laws, or do things that go contrary to the Constitution. And if Congress doesn't step in, then the only option for those who want to challenge the orders is to go to court.
特朗普本可要求国会立法实施这些政策（毕竟共和党控制两院），但立法耗时且国会正全力推进总统标志性国内法案——所谓"美丽大法案"，无暇顾及其他。当然，行政令完全属于总统职权，源自宪法第二条。只要援引立法授权，这些行政令就具有法律效力。总统不能凭空造法或违宪行事，若国会不介入，挑战者只能诉诸法院。
---
**Getty Images While other presidents have clashed with the courts, Trump's confrontations are unquestionably unique in their scale**
盖蒂图片社 特朗普与法院的冲突规模空前
The sweeping nature of the orders he has signed, many touching on constitutional issues such as the right of everyone born in the US to citizenship, has led to dozens of nationwide injunctions pending the outcome on the merits of the individual cases. That is why Trump's Supreme Court victory at the end of June, curbing such nationwide injunctions, is so significant."These district court judges have been totally out of line and out of control," argues Jeff Anderson.
这些涉及出生公民权等宪法问题的广泛行政令，引发数十项全国性禁制令。因此最高法院六月限制此类禁制令的裁决意义重大。"这些地方法官完全越界失控，"安德森称。
---
**Are judges blocking 'electorate desires'?**
**法官在阻挠"选民意愿"吗？**
The administration has deployed various arguments. The judiciary has been accused of"overreach" and judges themselves accused of being"activists". But perhaps the most fundamental – and most philosophical – criticism is that they are standing in the way of the will of the people. As Stephen Miller has put it,"out of control Marxist judges" are standing in the way of the"desires of the electorate". It's an argument that, according to many judges, misunderstands the constitution in a fundamental way."We're a nation of laws, not men," explains judge John E Jones III."A mandate to the president of the United States does not mean a mandate to disregard the law. That's evident, but this is papering over a fundamental disregard of the law and the constitution."
政府提出多种论点：指责司法"越权"、法官是"激进派"。但最根本（也最哲学）的批评是他们阻碍人民意志。正如米勒所言"失控的马克思主义法官"阻挠"选民意愿"。许多法官认为这从根本上误解了宪法。"我们是法治而非人治国家，"琼斯法官解释，"总统的授权不等于可以无视法律。这显而易见，但他们在掩盖对法律和宪法的根本漠视。"
---
**Getty Images Executive orders are perfectly within the president's prerogative under Article II of the US Constitution**
盖蒂图片社 根据宪法第二条，行政令完全属于总统职权
There are signs that some individuals in the administration, despite its assertions to the contrary, could well be toying with flouting the authority of the courts. The president's border tsar, Tom Homan, went on television over a court's attempts to prevent the deportation of several hundred Venezuelans and said:"I'm proud to be a part of this administration. We're not stopping. … I don't care what the judges think." But, in his interview with me last week, the President denied he was defying the judiciary, pointing out that when rulings have gone against him, he has sought remedy through the court process."I have too much respect for it to defy it. I have great respect for the judiciary. And you can see that," he told me, adding:"That's why I'm winning on appeal."
有迹象表明，尽管政府否认，但某些官员可能正试探藐视法院权威。边境事务主管汤姆·霍曼在电视上谈及法院阻止驱逐数百名委内瑞拉人时称："我自豪成为政府一员。我们不会停...我才不管法官怎么想。"但特朗普上周接受我采访时否认藐视司法，指出败诉后都通过司法程序寻求补救。"我太尊重司法了，不会藐视它。你们能看到这点，"他补充道，"所以我才在上诉中获胜。"
---
**'The US faces a catastrophic situation'**
**"美国面临灾难性局面"**
Some vocal critics of the president go further and claim he's tearing up the whole system of checks and balances in which the three equal branches of government (the presidency, congress and the judiciary) each act as a brake on the others."This is a huge turning point for the country," says Professor Laurence Tribe, one of the nation's foremost constitutional experts, who has become a forthright critic of the president. He argues that Congress has ceased to perform its oversight function and fears"the United States is facing a catastrophic situation"."The idea of three branches… was hatched at our founding - before the rise of political parties and before the rise of demagogues as effective and charismatic as Trump," he told me."The whole system is completely out of balance."
一些批评者更进一步，称特朗普正在破坏三权分立制衡体系。顶尖宪法学者劳伦斯·特赖布教授指出："这是国家重大转折点。"他认为国会已丧失监督职能，"美国面临灾难性局面"。"三权分立理念诞生于建国初期——政党崛起前，特朗普这样有魅力的煽动家出现前。现在整个体系完全失衡。"
---
**EPA**
EPA
That balance that Professor Tribe talks about has long been debated and the shift in power towards the presidency is not a new complaint. After the Watergate scandal in the 1970s, which saw President Richard Nixon flout many of the norms followed by previous presidents, a whole slew of legislation was passed to curb the executive and make it more accountable. But some of the changes involved merely adopting new norms such as publication of presidential tax returns and avoiding financial conflicts of interest – and this president has showed little concern to be seen to follow those norms.
特赖布教授谈到的平衡问题由来已久，总统权力扩张也不是新抱怨。水门事件后虽通过大量立法约束行政权，但部分改革仅涉及新规范（如公布总统税表、避免利益冲突）——而本届总统显然不在意这些规范。
---
**The judiciary is fighting back**
**司法系统反击**
When it comes to the relationship between the presidency and the courts, though, even Nixon stopped short of defying their authority, eventually handing over the infamous Watergate tapes, after months of refusing to do so, once the Supreme Court unanimously ordered it. Trump has come close to defiance. In one instance, after being ordered to facilitate the return of a man wrongly deported to El Salvador, Kilmar Ábrego García, the administration was accused of slow-walking the process of complying with the Supreme Court's decision. Even Trump's Attorney General, Pam Bondi, said:"He's not coming back to our country." It took two months for the administration to follow the court's order. That was seen by the president's critics as a taste of what could follow. After all, there are only two ways a president can be truly held to account – one is by removal at an election; the second is by impeachment in Congress, and Trump has already survived two of those.
即便尼克松在最高法院一致裁决后，最终也交出了水门录音带。特朗普则近乎违抗——在被要求协助错误驱逐的萨尔瓦多公民基尔马尔·阿布雷戈·加西亚回国时，政府被指拖延执行。甚至司法部长帕姆·邦迪都说："他不会回到我国。"政府花了两个月才遵守法院命令。批评者视此为未来预兆。毕竟问责总统只有两种途径：选举下台或国会弹劾——特朗普已挺过两次弹劾。
---
**AFP via Getty Images This battle is far from over – and its consequences for future presidents are unpredictable**
AFP通过盖蒂图片社 这场斗争远未结束——其对未来总统的影响难以预测
But if there truly is a plan to defy or neuter the courts, the judiciary is not giving in without a fight. Even after the Supreme Court ruled to curb those nationwide injunctions at the end of June (incidentally, presidents of both parties have complained about such injunctions in the past), another judge slapped one on Trump's asylum policy. Earlier this month, a US district judge issued a fresh nationwide block on Trump's executive order restricting the automatic right to citizenship for babies born to undocumented migrants or foreign visitors, drawing more furious words from the White House. This battle is enjoined, but it's far from over – and its consequences for this president and future presidents are unpredictable. Top image credits: Bloomberg via Getty and EPA-EFE/REX/Shutterstock
但若真有削弱法院的计划，司法系统不会束手就擒。即便最高法院六月裁决后，仍有法官对特朗普的庇护政策发布禁制令。本月早些时候，一名地方法官再次全国性叫停其限制"出生公民权"的行政令，引发白宫激烈回应。这场战斗已经开始，但远未结束——其对现任及未来总统的影响难以预料。顶部图片来源：彭博社通过盖蒂图片社和EPA-EFE/REX/Shutterstock
