The Trump administration is deploying aggressive legal tactics to prevent its top customs official from appearing in court under oath to explain why $166 billion in illegally collected tariffs remain undispersed to businesses owed refunds.
According to the New York Times, the administration is actively resisting a court order mandating full refunds, creating the possibility that only some importers will receive complete repayment. In contrast, others face partial reimbursement or delays.
At the center of the legal battle is Rodney S. Scott, commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border Protection, whom federal Judge Richard K. Eaton ordered to testify after growing frustrated with the government's handling of the refund process. The judge's unusual demand for Scott's personal appearance signaled deep judicial skepticism about administration claims regarding the tariff refund delays.
Rather than comply, Justice Department lawyers filed an emergency appeal late Tuesday, described by the Times as a "highly aggressive response," seeking to shield Scott from testifying, offering to send a substitute official instead. The government's appeal also included subtle hints that it would escalate to the Supreme Court if necessary, the Times is reporting.
The judge, apparently infuriated by the administration's stonewalling, doubled down by ordering Scott to appear at a "hearing on June 9." When government lawyers attempted to block that demand, the judge denied their request, forcing the Justice Department to file a late Tuesday appeal seeking court intervention.
The administration simultaneously filed a separate notice challenging the original court refund order altogether—a move that could delay repayments indefinitely.
Sara Albrecht, chair of the Liberty Justice Center representing small businesses in the case, emphasized the stakes for struggling importers.
"At the end of the day, this money belongs to the businesses that paid it," she told the Times. "For the past year, many small businesses were forced to give effectively all of their working capital to the government supporting their illegal tariff scheme."
