2026-09-05T10:30:29.662Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/09/05/politics/trump-laws-ballroom-arch-construction-dc
对有关总统头像出现在硬币上的法律条文进行直白解读的话，在任总统的头像不应出现在货币上。然而唐纳德·特朗普总统的头像却被印在了硬币上，这是因为他的财政部利用了另一项与纪念币相关的法律条款。
该法律规定，总统未经国会批准，不得将美军投入敌对行动超过60天。尽管美国政府声称在对伊战争中存在停火时段，但美国与伊朗的冲突已经持续了六个多月。两党历任总统都曾试图规避这一要求，但都未达到特朗普对伊战争的级别。
首席大法官约翰·罗伯茨曾称，特朗普拆除白宫部分区域并进行其他建设的行为“很可能违法”。但目前相关工程仍在昼夜不停赶工，只为让特朗普能早日享用这座白宫舞厅。
法律似乎要求国会批准在阿灵顿国家公墓附近建造凯旋门。但特朗普政府并未等待国会批准，内政部似乎即将启动挖掘工作。
法律规定，涉嫌犯罪者未经审判不得被处以死刑。但美国军方在加勒比海和太平洋地区已经击毁了多艘涉嫌贩毒的船只。
法律规定，国会有权设立联邦政府机构，例如美国国际开发署、美国教育部和消费者金融保护局。但特朗普仍试图通过削减预算或直接撤销的方式终结其中部分机构。
法律规定，国会决定资金的分配去向。但这并未阻止特朗普政府削减其 simply 不认同的研究经费和援助资金。
法律规定，政府未经司法搜查令不得进入民众住宅。但美国移民及海关执法局一直在滥用这项权力。
法律规定，美联储应独立运作，但这并未阻止特朗普向美联储施压要求降息——最近一次是通过威胁停止与主要贸易伙伴的贸易往来。
这样的例子不胜枚举，特朗普政府为此提出了复杂的法律论点——在那些不得不做出解释的场合。
即便在法庭上遭遇挫折，特朗普政府仍厚颜无耻地寻找规避法律的途径。
一名法官裁定，特朗普政府不能无视法律，将他的名字与约翰·F·肯尼迪的名字一同刻在肯尼迪艺术中心上。但政府仍计划将他的名字添加到建筑上，具体方式是添加一段铭文，为特朗普在翻新工程中所做的“贡献”背书。如果无法直接将名字刻在建筑上，政府甚至威胁要将整个建筑拆除。
总统拆除本无权拆除的建筑，这恰如其分地类比了整个特朗普政府的执政风格。一旦某样东西被拆除，就再也回不来了。是否通过非法手段将其拆除并不重要。
罗伯茨与法院自由派大法官一同持反对意见，虽未成功，但他认为特朗普的东翼工程“很可能违法”，应予以叫停。在反对意见中，罗伯茨引用了二战时期温斯顿·丘吉尔的话。
“我们塑造建筑，而后建筑塑造我们。”丘吉尔曾如此说道。罗伯茨并未提及，丘吉尔发表这番言论是为了论证英国下议院应按照纳粹轰炸前的原貌重建。丘吉尔希望将其重建为英国政体的纪念碑。
特朗普将白宫东翼视为拆除重建项目——在罗伯茨看来，这是一场（很可能）违法的拆除行动。但特朗普为自己打造的纪念物——众多纪念物之一——仍在顺利建造中。在墙体被拆除之后，特朗普政府才向国会申请拨款资助该项目。
在特朗普的第二任期内，这已成为一种模式：总统采取行动；国会无动于衷；最高法院则允许他继续推进，无论其行为严格来说是否合法。
就在罗伯茨发表此番历史感慨的一周前，最高法院自由派大法官凯坦吉·布朗·杰克逊严厉批评了包括罗伯茨在内的保守派大法官，称他们以程序细节为由再次允许特朗普的邮寄选票削减行政令生效。
杰克逊表示，白宫采取了“有本事就来抓我”的策略。
在扰乱邮寄选票的案件中，特朗普最终可能会被追责；该行政令仍面临诉讼和新的禁制令，至少在本次选举期间似乎无法实施。
特朗普在出生权公民权问题上也栽了跟头，大法官们驳回了他试图搁置宪法第十四修正案的企图。在关税问题上，最高法院也裁定他不得利用国家紧急状态法破坏经济。
他仍在寻找规避该裁决的途径。
但在诸多其他问题上，特朗普政府自行选择遵守哪些法律，四处挪用资金，且几乎未公开解释其行为。国会对此无动于衷。法院难以跟上其步伐，而最高法院更倾向于让特朗普继续推进事务，等待后续理清。
这种态势至少在明年可能会有所改变，如果民主党赢得众议院或参议院的控制权。他们将试图限制为特朗普的目标提供资金。
但对于希望在2029年取代特朗普入主白宫的民主党人来说，这将是一个有趣的问题。他们是否应该投入更多纳税人资金，拆除特朗普正在建造的东翼庞然大物？他们无法将印有特朗普头像的硬币从流通中收回。他们也无法将未经审判就被驱逐的民众重新遣返。如果下一任总统有意为之，要重建特朗普政府削减的科学和医学研究资助体系，也将耗费时间和精力。
在特朗普所做的诸多事情中，亡羊补牢甚至可能都已无从谈起。
Trump’s ‘Catch-Me-If-You-Can’ presidency keeps finding ways around the law
2026-09-05T10:30:29.662Z / https://www.cnn.com/2026/09/05/politics/trump-laws-ballroom-arch-construction-dc
A plain reading of the law about presidents on coins says the face of a living president should not be on currency. And yet President Donald Trump’s is, after his Treasury Department exploited a different law related to commemorative coins.
The law says a president must not commit the US military into hostilities for longer than 60 days without congressional approval. The US has been in a conflict with Iran for more than six months, although the administration says it has taken time-outs in the war. Previous presidents from both parties have danced around this requirement, but nothing on the level of Trump’s war on Iran.
Chief Justice John Roberts called it “likely unlawful” for Trump to tear down part of the White House and build something else. And yet construction is happening around the clock to get that White House ballroom done for Trump to enjoy.
Laws would seem to require Congress to approve the construction of a triumphal arch adjacent to Arlington National Cemetery. The administration isn’t waiting and the Department of Interior appears primed to start excavation shortly.
The law says suspected criminals should not be put to death without a trial. And yet the US military has taken out numerous alleged drug boats in the Caribbean and Pacific.
The law says Congress creates agencies of the federal government, like USAID, the US Department of Education and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Trump has tried to end some of them anyway, either through starvation or outright deletion.
The law says Congress decides where money should go. That didn’t stop Trump’s administration from cutting research funding and aid money it simply disagreed with.
The law says the government should not be entering people’s homes without a judicial warrant. But Immigration and Customs Enforcement has utilized that power.
The law says the Federal Reserve should operate independently, but that isn’t stopping Trump from trying to pressure the Fed to lower interest rates — most recently via a threat to cease trade with top partners.
The list goes on, and with it the complicated legal arguments the Trump administration has made – in those instances when it has had to make them.
Even when faced with setbacks in court, Trump’s administration has brazenly looked for end-runs.
A judge ruled Trump’s administration can’t ignore the law and put his name alongside John F. Kennedy’s on the Kennedy Center. But the administration plans to add it to the building anyway, by adding an inscription giving Trump credit for the rehab job. And if the administration can’t put the name on the building, it threatens to tear the whole thing down.
The tearing-down of buildings the president should not be able to tear down is an apt analogy for this whole presidency. Once something is gone, it’s gone. It doesn’t matter if getting rid of it was illegal.
Roberts sided with liberals on the court to argue – in an unsuccessful dissent – that Trump’s East Wing project should be halted because it was “likely unlawful.” In his dissent, Roberts quoted Winston Churchill during World War II.
“We shape our buildings, and afterwards our buildings shape us,” Churchill had said. Roberts didn’t mention that Churchill made those comments to argue the British House of Commons should be rebuilt as it had stood before it was destroyed by Nazi bombs. Churchill wanted to rebuild it as a monument to the British form of government.
Trump saw the White House East Wing as a tear-down project — a (likely) illegal tear-down in Roberts’ eyes. But Trump’s monument to himself – one of many — is getting built nonetheless. Asking Congress for the taxpayer money to help with the project came only after the walls were torn down.
It has become a pattern during Trump’s second term that the president does something; Congress shrugs; and the Supreme Court allows him to proceed, regardless of whether what he’s doing is, strictly speaking, legal.
A week before Roberts’ historical lament, the liberal Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson blasted the court’s conservatives, including Roberts, for allowing Trump’s executive order meant to cut down on mail-in voting to proceed, again on a technicality.
The White House has a “Catch-Me-If-You-Can approach,” Jackson said.
In the case of disrupting mail-in ballots, Trump may ultimately get caught; the executive order still faces lawsuits and a new injunction that make it seem impossible to impose, at least for this election.
Trump also got caught on birthright citizenship, where justices rejected his attempt to set aside the Constitution’s 14th Amendment. And on tariffs, they said no, he could not exploit national emergency laws to upend the economy.
He’s still looking for ways around that decision.
But on so many other issues, Trump’s administration has picked the laws it wants to follow, diverted funds here or there, and said little in public about what it’s up to. Congress has shrugged. Courts have had trouble keeping up, and the Supreme Court has preferred to let Trump go about his business while things get sorted out.
That dynamic seems likely to change, at least somewhat, come next year if Democrats win control of either the House or the Senate. They will try to restrict funding for Trump’s goals.
But it will be an interesting question for Democrats who want to replace Trump in the White House in 2029. Should they spend even more taxpayer money to tear down the East Wing behemoth he’s building? They won’t be able to go back and take the coins with his face out of circulation. They can’t un-deport people who didn’t get a hearing. And it will take time and effort, if the next president is so inclined, to rebuild the system of scientific and medical research funding the Trump administration cut back.
On so many of the things Trump has done, catching up may not even be an option.
发表回复