Trump owes Americans billions — and he might be forced to pay

President Donald Trump has stalled refunding the billions he owes US businesses and taxpayers from his illegal tariffs — and, according to a top lawyer, Americans need to thank the obscure judge for being a “breath of fresh air” who holds “the administration’s feet to the fire.”

Writing for MS NOW on Sunday, lawyer Ray Brescia explained that the Court of International Trade’s Judge Richard Eaton has emerged as “an unlikely hero” in the Trump tariff saga, working with speed and clarity to figure out how Trump should reimburse billions to the American people.

“While one might think this was a recipe for mischief, an unlikely hero has arisen, Judge Richard Eaton of that court, who appears to be holding the administration’s feet to the fire and does not appear like he is about to tolerate many shenanigans should the administration seek to drag those feet in an effort to evade the law,” Brescia explained. Writing for the tariff case of Atmus Filtration, Inc. v. United States, Easton issued “a simple, three-page order” that ordered “Customs and Border Protection to refund the illegal tariffs paid by American companies. At a time when lawyers and judges gravitate toward complex reasoning, obscuring jargon and legal briefs and opinions that seemingly go on forever, Eaton has taught a masterclass in simple, concise and clear language.”

Importantly, Eaton established that his court was endowed with “national geographic jurisdiction” and “exclusive subject matter jurisdiction” over the tariff claims, then extended the Supreme Court’s recent ruling demanding Trump reimburse illegally collected tariffs as applying to all importers, since any other interpretation of that ruling would “thwart the efficient administration of justice.” After the administration tried to further stall paying back the tariffs, Eaton issued a second ruling “weighing in at just two pages” that kept Customs and Border Protection “on an incredibly tight leash.” He also “laid out the stakes” involved in the Trump administration continuing to delay paying back what it took in tariffs.

“The $165 billion in collected duties is currently accruing approximately $650 million in interest every single month,” Brescia pointed out, citing Eaton. “If the entries are not liquidated by the end of the year, he explained, American taxpayers will be on the hook for an estimated $10 billion in interest alone.”

Ultimately, Brescia characterized Eaton’s ruling as “a breath of fresh air” because they were succinct and efficiently addressed the core issue at play.

“He saw a problem — billions of dollars in illegally collected taxes and an administration reluctant to return them — and he used his court’s unique jurisdictional power to solve it,” Brescia observed. “The Constitution requires that tariffs be lawful, and the Supreme Court has confirmed that these were not. But rights without remedies are meaningless. Thanks to the brevity, clarity and undeniable courage of a seasoned judge in lower Manhattan, who no doubt has seen his share of litigant mischief in his court for decades, the rule of law is being enforced in as straightforward and efficient a manner as possible.”

Since the 19th century, the Democratic Party has traditionally supported low tariffs and the Republican Party has traditionally supported high tariffs. Republicans’ so-called protectionism waned after the 1930s, when President Herbert Hoover’s unpopular Smoot-Hawley tariffs were widely blamed for worsening the Great Depression. Yet Trump made protectionism popular again during his presidential campaigns from 2016 through 2024, claiming that high tariffs will compel manufacturers and other large companies to create jobs in the United States.

So far, that prediction has not panned out.

“There’s no denying the February report was lousy,” The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board wrote earlier in March regarding the most recent jobs report. “The U.S. shed 92,000 jobs and revised down gains for January and December by a combined 69,000. The question is what to make of the declines.”

The Journal did not go so far as to blame the poor economy on Trump’s tariffs, but clearly stated that removing them would help matters.

“Oh, and if Mr. Trump wants a tax-cut boost for the economy while the war continues, he could call off his new 15% universal tariff,” the Journal wrote. “Consider it our contribution to easing everyone’s economic anxiety.”

Another conservative, commentator Mona Charen from The Bulwark, speculated in February that voters will likely blame Trump’s tariffs for the struggling economy regardless of the president’s attempts to spin the situation otherwise.

“Voters are rarely able to connect policy to outcomes, but they have done so in the case of tariffs,” Charen argued. “Back in 2024, Americans were about equally divided on the question of trade, with some favoring higher tariffs and roughly similar numbers opting for lower tariffs. Experience has changed their views.”

Similarly, in February the liberal-leaning think tank Center for American Progress released a study demonstrating that Trump’s tariffs have cost the US 100,000 manufacturing since he took office.

“Far from the manufacturing sector ‘roaring back’ as Trump promised, the United States has lost more than 100,000 manufacturing jobs over the past year,” Allison McManus and Dawn Le of the Center for American Progress explained. “These actions have pushed the country’s closest trading partners to seek deals elsewhere, including with China: Canada, India, Japan, South Korea, and the European Union have all recently sought new agreements without the United States.”

They concluded, “Over time, each of these deals will result in markets that were once enjoyed by U.S. suppliers increasingly oriented away from them — and the rules of international engagement increasingly written by foreign governments.”

The White House, by contrast, has fiercely defended its tariffs. Responding to AlterNet about a February Fortune article describing Trump’s protectionism as a “wrongheaded mercantilist view of international trade and external accounts,” White House spokesman Kush Desai said that “the U.S. Trade Representative comprehensively laid out in a 2025 report how America’s trading partners were systematically ripping off American workers, farmers, and industries with unfair trade barriers and tariffs. President Trump’s trade rhetoric is backed up by a clear pattern of facts and data – and both the President and his trade team are hard at work to reverse America Last policies that have left our country behind.”

• george conway
• noam chomsky
• civil war
• Kayleigh mcenany
• Melania trump
• drudge report
• paul krugman
• Lindsey graham
• Lincoln project
• al franken bill maher
• People of praise
• Ivanka trump
• eric trump