白宫近期试图加强对美联储的控制，这正是特朗普惯用的斗争策略。他向来擅长将矛头精准对准那些通常被视作难以辩驳的个人或机构，不断试探规范、先例、宪法边界及美国价值观的底线。在最新行动中，特朗普试图罢免美联储理事莉萨·库克（Lisa Cook）——此事的起因是上周联邦住房金融局（FHFA）局长威廉·普尔特（William Pulte）收到一则“匿名举报”，指控库克存在抵押贷款欺诈行为。
鉴于初步证据看起来确凿无疑，库克理事并非值得同情的对象。不过，倘若她确实存在不当行为，就其严重程度而言，似乎与特朗普因虚报资产价值以获取优惠贷款及保险费率而被判定银行欺诈罪的行为不相上下。这并非为库克辩护，而是揭示法治屈从于统治者意志所呈现出的双重标准与虚伪性。这位美联储理事尚有十余年任期，尚未被证实存在故意违法行为，其抵押贷款申请中的错误可能仅属文书疏漏。同样重要的是，公平原则与正当法律程序作为核心准则，超越民意或个人道德。
例如，1988年美国最高法院诉拉里·弗林特（Larry Flynt）一案的判决再次明确，即便这位厌恶女性、声名狼藉的色情出版商的作品内容多么令人不适，其言论自由仍应受到保护。该判决明确指出：“言论自由不仅是个人自由的体现……对共同追求真理及维系社会整体活力也至关重要。”同样，在1977年著名的“斯科基事件”判决中，尽管最高法院对伊利诺伊州斯科基市纳粹党人的活动深感厌恶，但仍坚定维护其依据宪法第一修正案享有的权利。
正当程序对保障个人公平至关重要，而对正当程序的尊重则关乎制度自由与法治根基。1913年颁布的《联邦储备法》明确规定，美联储不受美国总统管辖，而是作为一个独立、非政治性、自筹资金的机构存在，完全无需依赖纳税人支持。美联储的决策并非总能尽善尽美——我们也曾在其对经济调控过度时批评其时而反应迟缓。然而，美联储的独立性对美国经济的全球地位及美元作为全球储备货币的地位至关重要。央行独立原则正是美国货币体系赢得信任与尊重、历来不受政治干预而陷入混乱的根源所在。近期土耳其的案例便是反面教材：埃尔多安总统对央行的破坏性干预，导致该国通胀率飙升、里拉汇率暴跌。
就库克理事案而言，目前那些看似有力的指控仍停留在指控层面，尚未形成正式起诉。在没有定罪判决的情况下，鉴于总统本人已被证实存在类似违法行为，当前局面引发了人们对“平等保护权”的质疑。事实上，倘若针对库克的指控确凿有力，那么特朗普的拙劣干预可能打乱美国司法部的节奏——该部门原本可能已准备根据联邦住房金融局移交的材料对库克提起公诉。而今，特朗普的政治干预反而可能成为库克最有力的辩护依据。
一贯特征
这种双重标准已成为特朗普第二任期的一贯特征，其典型表现包括对非法移民的虐待，以及在全美主要城市实现市政执法军事化。在这两种情况下，尽管非法移民中罪犯所占比例极低，且各大城市的犯罪率实则在持续下降，但那些维护公平、坚守正当程序、捍卫宪法精神与美国价值观的人士，仍被描绘成为“入侵的外国罪犯”辩护、为城市犯罪开脱的形象，进而陷入难堪境地。
正直爱国的公众人物面临的挑战在于：如何在捍卫那些构成美国国家特质的基础原则的同时，避免落入特朗普为选定对象精心设置的“流沙陷阱”。传达信息时必须做到有所区分，但也要避免陷入冗长空洞、晦涩抽象的解释，或成为更易遭受诋毁的对象。
这一局面对商界领袖的启示显而易见。首席执行官们必须意识到：若只是置身事外、忧心忡忡地旁观，他们同样可能在无意间沦为“侵蚀美国核心价值观”的帮凶——如今已有同行企业被迫出让巨额利润或股权以在美国开展业务（涉及领域从人工智能、半导体芯片，到农业、保险业），实则遭遇勒索。
以逐步施压的手段，迫使私营企业的治理屈从于单一政治霸凌者的意志，这或许无法赢得所有民粹主义者的同情，但本质上与美联储独立性的逐渐丧失及法治的沦丧并无二致。同样，特朗普对美国城市发起的范围日益扩大的“攻击”，也在侵蚀美国“州权与地方问责制”这一国家根本特质。当前最核心的挑战在于：我们必须认识到，对极权化进程做出渐进式、潜移默化的让步，终将导致国家特质丧失。（*）
杰弗里·索南菲尔德（Jeffrey Sonnenfeld）是耶鲁大学管理实践莱斯特·克朗教授，耶鲁首席执行官领导力研究所创始人。
斯蒂芬·亨里克斯（Stephen Henriques）是耶鲁首席执行官领导力研究所高级研究员，曾担任麦肯锡咨询公司（McKinsey & Company）顾问及康涅狄格州州长政策分析师。
Fortune.com上发表的评论文章中表达的观点，仅代表作者本人的观点，不代表《财富》杂志的观点和立场。
译者：中慧言-王芳
白宫近期试图加强对美联储的控制，这正是特朗普惯用的斗争策略。他向来擅长将矛头精准对准那些通常被视作难以辩驳的个人或机构，不断试探规范、先例、宪法边界及美国价值观的底线。在最新行动中，特朗普试图罢免美联储理事莉萨·库克（Lisa Cook）——此事的起因是上周联邦住房金融局（FHFA）局长威廉·普尔特（William Pulte）收到一则“匿名举报”，指控库克存在抵押贷款欺诈行为。
鉴于初步证据看起来确凿无疑，库克理事并非值得同情的对象。不过，倘若她确实存在不当行为，就其严重程度而言，似乎与特朗普因虚报资产价值以获取优惠贷款及保险费率而被判定银行欺诈罪的行为不相上下。这并非为库克辩护，而是揭示法治屈从于统治者意志所呈现出的双重标准与虚伪性。这位美联储理事尚有十余年任期，尚未被证实存在故意违法行为，其抵押贷款申请中的错误可能仅属文书疏漏。同样重要的是，公平原则与正当法律程序作为核心准则，超越民意或个人道德。
例如，1988年美国最高法院诉拉里·弗林特（Larry Flynt）一案的判决再次明确，即便这位厌恶女性、声名狼藉的色情出版商的作品内容多么令人不适，其言论自由仍应受到保护。该判决明确指出：“言论自由不仅是个人自由的体现……对共同追求真理及维系社会整体活力也至关重要。”同样，在1977年著名的“斯科基事件”判决中，尽管最高法院对伊利诺伊州斯科基市纳粹党人的活动深感厌恶，但仍坚定维护其依据宪法第一修正案享有的权利。
正当程序对保障个人公平至关重要，而对正当程序的尊重则关乎制度自由与法治根基。1913年颁布的《联邦储备法》明确规定，美联储不受美国总统管辖，而是作为一个独立、非政治性、自筹资金的机构存在，完全无需依赖纳税人支持。美联储的决策并非总能尽善尽美——我们也曾在其对经济调控过度时批评其时而反应迟缓。然而，美联储的独立性对美国经济的全球地位及美元作为全球储备货币的地位至关重要。央行独立原则正是美国货币体系赢得信任与尊重、历来不受政治干预而陷入混乱的根源所在。近期土耳其的案例便是反面教材：埃尔多安总统对央行的破坏性干预，导致该国通胀率飙升、里拉汇率暴跌。
就库克理事案而言，目前那些看似有力的指控仍停留在指控层面，尚未形成正式起诉。在没有定罪判决的情况下，鉴于总统本人已被证实存在类似违法行为，当前局面引发了人们对“平等保护权”的质疑。事实上，倘若针对库克的指控确凿有力，那么特朗普的拙劣干预可能打乱美国司法部的节奏——该部门原本可能已准备根据联邦住房金融局移交的材料对库克提起公诉。而今，特朗普的政治干预反而可能成为库克最有力的辩护依据。
一贯特征
这种双重标准已成为特朗普第二任期的一贯特征，其典型表现包括对非法移民的虐待，以及在全美主要城市实现市政执法军事化。在这两种情况下，尽管非法移民中罪犯所占比例极低，且各大城市的犯罪率实则在持续下降，但那些维护公平、坚守正当程序、捍卫宪法精神与美国价值观的人士，仍被描绘成为“入侵的外国罪犯”辩护、为城市犯罪开脱的形象，进而陷入难堪境地。
正直爱国的公众人物面临的挑战在于：如何在捍卫那些构成美国国家特质的基础原则的同时，避免落入特朗普为选定对象精心设置的“流沙陷阱”。传达信息时必须做到有所区分，但也要避免陷入冗长空洞、晦涩抽象的解释，或成为更易遭受诋毁的对象。
这一局面对商界领袖的启示显而易见。首席执行官们必须意识到：若只是置身事外、忧心忡忡地旁观，他们同样可能在无意间沦为“侵蚀美国核心价值观”的帮凶——如今已有同行企业被迫出让巨额利润或股权以在美国开展业务（涉及领域从人工智能、半导体芯片，到农业、保险业），实则遭遇勒索。
以逐步施压的手段，迫使私营企业的治理屈从于单一政治霸凌者的意志，这或许无法赢得所有民粹主义者的同情，但本质上与美联储独立性的逐渐丧失及法治的沦丧并无二致。同样，特朗普对美国城市发起的范围日益扩大的“攻击”，也在侵蚀美国“州权与地方问责制”这一国家根本特质。当前最核心的挑战在于：我们必须认识到，对极权化进程做出渐进式、潜移默化的让步，终将导致国家特质丧失。（*）
杰弗里·索南菲尔德（Jeffrey Sonnenfeld）是耶鲁大学管理实践莱斯特·克朗教授，耶鲁首席执行官领导力研究所创始人。
斯蒂芬·亨里克斯（Stephen Henriques）是耶鲁首席执行官领导力研究所高级研究员，曾担任麦肯锡咨询公司（McKinsey & Company）顾问及康涅狄格州州长政策分析师。
Fortune.com上发表的评论文章中表达的观点，仅代表作者本人的观点，不代表《财富》杂志的观点和立场。
译者：中慧言-王芳
The White House’s latest effort to tighten control over the Federal Reserve exemplifies President Trump’s typical tactics in battle. He has an uncanny knack for pushing the limits of protocol, precedent, constitutional boundaries, and American values by targeting individuals or organizations that are often seen as difficult to defend. In his latest bid, Trump has tried to remove Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook from her position after allegations of mortgage fraud emerged last week, prompted by an “anonymous tip” that landed on the desk of Federal Housing Finance Agency Director (FHFA) William Pulte.
Gov. Cook is not a sympathetic target, as early evidence looks damning. Still, any alleged misconduct on her part seems almost as reprehensible as the bank fraud that led to Trump’s conviction for inflating the value of his assets to obtain favorable loan and insurance rates. This is not to defend Cook, but rather to illustrate the parallelism and hypocrisy of the rule of law being subordinated to the law of the ruler. The Fed governor has over a dozen years remaining in her appointed term, she has not yet been proven to have intentionally broken any laws, and she may have made a clerical error in her mortgage applications. Equally important are the issues of fairness and due process as core principles that transcend popularity and personal morality.
For example, the 1988 Supreme Court decision in favor of Larry Flynt reaffirmed the freedom of expression for the misogynistic, disgraceful pornographer, no matter how offensive his work was. Notably, that decision affirmed that “the freedom to speak one’s mind is not only an aspect of individual liberty … but also is essential to the common quest for truth and the vitality of society as a whole.” Similarly, in their 1977 decision on what became known as the “Skokie Affair,” the Supreme Court fortified the First Amendment rights of the Nazi party in Skokie, Illinois, however distasteful it found their activities.
As important as due process is for individual fairness, respect for due process is for institutional freedom and legality. The Federal Reserve Act of 1913 ensures that the Fed is not subordinate to the President of the United States but rather sits as an independent, non-political, self-funded institution. with zero taxpayer support. The Fed does not always get it right, and we have been critical of their periodic sluggishness, as they oversteer the economy. However, the independence of the Fed is critical to the U.S. economy’s global stature and the U.S. dollar serving as the world’s reserve currency. The principle of central banker independence is why the U.S. monetary system is trusted and respected and historically not disrupted by political interference. As we have seen recently in Turkey, President Erdogan’s disastrous interference has led to soaring inflation and plummeting depreciation of the Turkish lira.
In the context of Gov. Cook, the potentially compelling accusations amount at this time to allegations and not indictments. Without a guilty verdict, the situation raises questions about the right to equal protection, considering the president’s parallel proven violations. In fact, if there is a strong case against Cook, then Trump’s clumsy interference could subvert his own Justice Department, which may have been ready to indict Cook based on the FHFA referral. Her strongest defense may be Trump’s political interference.
A constant feature
Such duplicity has been a constant feature of the second Trump administration, characterized by the abusive treatment of undocumented immigrants and the militarization of municipal law enforcement in our nation’s major cities. In both instances, it places the defenders of fairness, due process, constitutionality, and American values in the problematic position of being portrayed as defending “invading foreign criminals” and excusing urban crime, despite the minuscule share of criminals among undocumented immigrants and the reality of plunging crime rates in metros.
The challenge for honorable, patriotic public figures is how to defend American principles that are foundational to our nation’s character without falling into the clever, quicksand-like trap that Trump has set for his chosen targets. Messaging must make distinctions, but also avoid getting lost in parenthetic abstractions or potentially easier-to-discredit targets.
The implications for business leaders are clear. CEOs must recognize that they, too, can inadvertently become complicit in the erosion of core American values as they merely watch, worried from the sidelines, as peer companies are subjected to extortion through the surrender of massive profits or equity stakes just to do business in the U.S.—ranging from AI and semiconductor chips to agriculture and insurance.
The subjugation of private enterprise governance to a single political bully through gradual stations may not seem to be a sympathetic cause to all populists, but it is equivalent to the gradual degradation of an independent Fed and the rule of law. Similarly, Trump’s expanding war on American cities is eroding our nation’s fundamental character regarding state rights and local accountability. The fundamental challenge is to realize that we lose our character through incremental, creeping concessions to the totalitarian process.
Jeffrey Sonnenfeld is Lester Crown Professor of Leadership Practice at the Yale School of Management and founder of the Yale Chief Executive Leadership Institute.
Stephen Henriques is a senior research fellow of the Yale Chief Executive Leadership Institute. He was a consultant at McKinsey & Company and a policy analyst for the governor of Connecticut.
The opinions expressed in Fortune.com commentary pieces are solely the views of their authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions and beliefs of Fortune.