

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
One organizer called the ruling a "victory for small businesses who have paid billions in unlawful tariffs and deserve their money back."
US customs officials are due to report to the Court of International Trade in New York on Friday to detail their plans for issuing billions of dollars in refunds to American businesses that paid tariffs which were struck down by the US Supreme Court last month.
On Wednesday, Judge Richard Eaton at the federal trade court ruled that "all importers of record" are "entitled to benefit" from the Supreme Court ruling that found President Donald Trump had illegally invoked the 1977 International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA) to impose tariffs on more than 300,000 US businesses that import goods, the vast majority of which were small businesses, as a central policy of his economic agenda.
The Supreme Court found Trump could not use the IEEPA to unilaterally set tariffs.
Eaton ruled in a case brought by Atmus Filtration, a company based in Nashville, Tennessee, which filed one of about 2,000 lawsuits at the trade court seeking refunds for the tariffs.
US Customs and Border Protection is likely to appeal the decision or “seek a stay to buy more time," former US trade official Ryan Majerus told NBC News, but Eaton did not appear convinced Wednesday when a Justice Department lawyer Claudia Burke, said in court that issuing refunds en masse would be time-consuming for the CBP and would necessitate the manual review of millions of entries.
"We live in the age of computers," said Eaton. "It must be possible for Customs Service to program its computers so it doesn't need a manual review.
Burke also told Eaton that the administration hadn't determined its position on refunding the tariffs, to which the judge replied: "Your position is clear. The Supreme Court told you what your position is."
Eaton noted that refunds are processed every day by CBP through a process called "liquidation" when goods are imported through the agency. CBP issues an accounting of what is owed by the importer, and the company has 180 days to formally contest its duties. The judge ordered customs officials to stop collecting tariffs on goods currently in the liquidation process and to recalculate duties for goods that were past the 180-day window, without the illegally imposed tariffs, resulting in a refund.
“Customs knows how to do this,” said Eaton. "They do it every day. They liquidate entries and make refunds."
Atmus Filtration estimated in court filings it had paid $11 million in illegal tariffs. The federal government collected $130 billion in tariffs under the IEEPA last year, and according to the Penn Wharton Budget Model, could ultimately owe $175 billion in refunds to businesses.
Sen. Mark Warner (D-Va.) said the Trump administration "must move quickly to reimburse the thousands of small businesses in Virginia and across the country that bore the brunt of President Trump’s harmful and illegal tariffs."
Dan Anthony, executive director of the We Pay the Tariffs coalition, called the ruling a "victory for small businesses who have paid billions in unlawful tariffs and deserve their money back."
"The court acted swiftly and correctly," said Anthony. "Now the ball is in the government's court and small businesses are concerned they will drag this out further. American small businesses have waited long enough. A full, fast, and automatic refund process is what these businesses are owed and anything less is unacceptable."
"Another significant victory for the rule of law over Trump's reign of lawlessness," said Rep. Jamie Raskin.
Congressman Jamie Raskin said the US Department of Justice's decision Monday to abandon its legal cases against law firms that refused to capitulate to President Donald Trump should serve as "a reminder that those who fight back against authoritarianism are winning."
The DOJ asked the US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia to dismiss its cases against law firms including Perkins Coie, WilmerHale, Susman Godfrey, and Jenner & Block, which won legal challenges they filed last year after Trump issued executive orders saying they should lose government contracts and their employees should be blocked from government buildings.
Those executive orders were signed because the firms represented and employed high-profile Democrats and other opponents of Trump.
Other law firms, including Skadden Arps and Paul Weiss, angered lawyers within their ranks and the larger legal community when they signed deals with Trump; the latter firm agreed to end its internal diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives and provide $40 million in free legal work for the president and causes he supports.
The Trump administration's decision on Monday proved, said Raskin (D-Md.), that "there’s no safety in appeasement.”
“When the Trump administration tried to bully and silence law firms by banning them from federal buildings, courthouses and contracts, a handful—like Susman Godfrey, Perkins Coie, Jenner & Block, and WilmerHale—fought back," said Raskin. "Today, those firms forced Trump to back down and abandon his blatantly unconstitutional effort to punish lawyers, clients, and causes because Trump disagrees with their speech. Meanwhile, the firms that chose to roll over saddled their associates and partners with doing billions of dollars-worth of free legal work for Trump, his twisted administration and his MAGA allies."
While other firms caved to Trump's demands last year, the companies that didn't quickly won legal victories, with one federal judge saying the executive order targeting Jenner & Block was “doubly violative of the Constitution" because it targeted the clients it represents as well as a lawyer it once employed—Andrew Weissman, who was part of former special counsel Robert Mueller's team that investigated Trump.
“This order, like the others, seeks to chill legal representation the administration doesn’t like, thereby insulating the executive branch from the judicial check fundamental to the separation of powers," US District Judge John Bates wrote last May. "It thus violates the Constitution and the court will enjoin its operation in full.”
"This episode will be remembered as demonstrating the difference between institutions that had the ethical courage to uphold the Constitution and fight bullying and then won, and those that compromised their ethics and gained nothing."
Jenner & Block said Monday that "the government’s decision to withdraw its appeals makes permanent the rulings of four federal judges that the executive orders targeting law firms, including Jenner & Block, were unconstitutional."
"Our partnership is proud to have stood firm on behalf of its clients, and we look forward to continuing to serve them—guided by these bedrock values—for many decades to come," said the firm.
Brian Hauss, deputy director of the Speech, Privacy, and Technology Project at the ACLU, said the DOJ had finally admitted "what everyone knew on Day 1: There is no way to defend these unconstitutional executive orders."
“This shameful assault on the rule of law has failed, thanks to the brave lawyers who refused to compromise their integrity," said Hauss.
Vanita Gupta, former associate attorney general under the Biden administration, told NBC News that the law groups that struck deals with the White House had "undermined the rule of law and the legal profession in this country."
"This episode will be remembered as demonstrating the difference between institutions that had the ethical courage to uphold the Constitution and fight bullying and then won, and those that compromised their ethics and gained nothing," Gupta said. "Let’s hope that media companies, universities, and other organizations pay heed."
In addition to his attacks on law firms, the president has threatened universities with funding cuts and federal investigations into what the White House views as antisemitism and extremism on campus and the colleges' efforts to promote diversity and inclusion.
At least six universities have struck deals with Trump. The University of Pennsylvania agreed to ban transgender student athletes from participating on women's sports teams and Columbia University agreed to further crack down on campus protests like those that erupted in 2024 against US support for Israel's assault on Gaza—protests that both the Biden and Trump administrations claimed were antisemitic.
Harvard sued the administration over its decision to freeze $2.2 billion in research funding and was granted a restraining order last year to protect international students whom the White House had threatened with visa restrictions.
On Monday, Raskin said the DOJ's decision to back down from the attacks on law firms was "another significant victory for the rule of law over Trump's reign of lawlessness."
"I’m convinced there’s a mess of financial crimes running throughout the Epstein story, and a lot of other people who were directly involved are still walking free," said the senator.
US Sen. Ron Wyden has given the Drug Enforcement Administration two weeks to provide key information on a secretive, long-running investigation into potential drug trafficking and money laundering by the late convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein and 14 co-conspirators.
The Oregon Democrat wrote to DEA Administrator Terrance Cole asking for a fully unredacted version of a 69-page memo from 2015 that was prepared by the director of the Organized Crime Drug Enforcement Task Forces (OCDETF) Fusion Center, a specialized Department of Justice (DOJ) unit that President Donald Trump shut down last year.
A heavily redacted version of the memo was included in the Epstein files that were released last month and referred to an OCDETF probe nicknamed "Chain Reaction."
The investigation had been opened in 2010, according to the document, and was still active at the time the memo was drafted. Epstein's 14 co-conspirators, all of whom had their names blacked out in the file release, were being investigated for "illegitimate wire transfers which are tied to illicit drug and/or prostitution activities occurring in the US Virgin Islands and New York City."
The Epstein Files Transparency Act, which required the release of files related to Epstein's sex trafficking operation, requires that redactions are used to protect the identities of victims, "not members of a criminal sex trafficking organization," Wyden wrote in his letter.
“The fact that Epstein was under investigation by [OCDETF] suggests that there was ample evidence indicating that Epstein was engaged in heavy drug trafficking and prostitution as part of cross-border criminal conspiracy. This is incredibly disturbing and raises serious questions as to how this investigation by the DEA was handled,” Wyden wrote.
“Since Epstein and his 14 co-conspirators were never charged by the DOJ for drug trafficking or financial crimes, I am concerned that the DEA and DOJ during the first Trump administration moved to terminate this investigation in order to protect pedophiles," he continued. "I am also concerned that the excessive redactions of this memorandum for operation ‘Chain Reaction’ go well beyond the intent of the Epstein Files Transparency Act."
In a statement on social media Friday, the senator said the Senate Finance Committee, of which he is the ranking member, needs "to know the results" of the OCDETF's investigation.
"Did it result in any charges being brought against the targets? Why did it end, and when? Did the first Trump administration squash it?" he asked.
This document is proof that it’s essential to keep following the money. I’m convinced there’s a mess of financial crimes running throughout the Epstein story, and a lot of other people who were directly involved are still walking free. That’s unacceptable.
— Senator Ron Wyden (@wyden.senate.gov) February 27, 2026 at 10:15 AM
"This is a big one," Wyden said of the redacted memo.
Wyden has led efforts to get to the bottom of financial secrets regarding Epstein's sex trafficking and other criminal operations. Last summer he drew attention to Suspicious Activity Reports that were filed with the US Department of the Treasury, including information on more than 4,725 wire transfers involving Epstein's bank accounts, totaling $1.5 billion in value.
The redacted memo in the Epstein files, he said, "is proof that it’s essential to keep following the money."