“如果特朗普因最高法院裁定他作为总统采取的行动不受起诉而藐视法院命令，那么执行他非法请求的人，即使是在听命行事，是否也可能被起诉或罚款？”——Kit Read 你好，Kit，也许。
“If Donald Trump defies court orders because the Supreme Court said he cannot be prosecuted for actions he takes as president, could those people who carry out his illegal requests be prosecuted or fined even though they are acting on his orders?” — Kit Read Hi Kit, Maybe.
最高法院2024年在特朗普诉美国案中的裁决仅直接涉及刑事豁免权，裁定总统对所有官方行为至少享有推定豁免权，对其“决定性和排他性”宪法权限范围内的行为享有绝对豁免权。
The Supreme Court’s 2024 ruling in Trump v. United States only dealt directly with criminal immunity , holding that they have at least presumptive immunity for all official acts, as well as absolute immunity for acts within their “conclusive and preclusive” constitutional authority.
这一切在实践中具体意味着什么，尚未完全阐明。需要后续案件来澄清该裁决的界限，目前尚不清楚此类案件何时或是否会出现。
What all that means in practice hasn’t been fully fleshed out. It would take a follow-up case to clarify the ruling’s limits, and it’s unclear if or when such a case will come.
无论如何，该裁决的对象是总统，并未授予代表总统行事的助手豁免权。
At any rate, the court focused on presidents in that ruling. It did not grant immunity to aides acting on the president’s behalf.
然而，尽管有人反对下属豁免权，但这在技术上仍是一个悬而未决的问题，大法官们尚未对此做出任何裁决。因此，目前对你的问题的回答是：也许。但你可能会问：为何要赋予总统下属豁免权？
Yet, while arguments have been made against subordinate immunity it’s technically an open question that the justices haven’t decided one way or the other. So the answer to your question at the moment is: maybe. But you might wonder: What could the argument be for immunizing presidential underlings?
一篇学术文章认为，豁免裁决的逻辑“使总统的下属对潜在广泛的官方行为享有绝对豁免权，即使这些行为本身可能违法”。理由是，如果总统对执法拥有完全权力，那么执行该权力的下属行为，与其说是违法但免于起诉，不如说是合法的。
One scholarly account argued that the logic of the immunity ruling “renders the President’s subordinates absolutely immune for a potentially broad range of official acts, even if those acts are otherwise unlawful.”That’s because if the president has complete power over executing the law, then, the argument goes, subordinate actions that implement that power are , as opposed to being unlawful but immune from prosecution.
与澄清豁免裁决对总统适用的界限一样，最高法院是否会裁决下属豁免权问题，取决于法院未来是否受理涉及该问题的上诉。与总统豁免权本身一样，目前也没有明确的候选案件供法院受理以回答该问题。
As with clarifying the immunity ruling’s limits as it applies to presidents, whether the Supreme Court will decide the subordinate immunity question depends on the court taking an appeal that raises that issue in the future. And as with presidential immunity itself, there is no clear candidate for an appeal the court would take to answer that question.
无论哪种情况，如果总统想确保他的任何爪牙都不会遭到联邦起诉，他总是可以赦免他们。那些执行非法命令的下属又该怎么办？
Either way, if a president wants to ensure that any of his henchmen won’t be federally prosecuted, he could always pardon them ordinates who carry out illegal orders?