Sara Albrecht’s conservative nonprofit organization spent $3.5 million challenging the legality of President Trump’s global tariffs — a fight that culminated in a Supreme Court victory three months ago that paved the way for businesses to seek billions of dollars in refunds. But the win came at a steep cost: the Liberty Justice Center lost more than 30% of its donors, received no corporate support for the litigation, and now faces the prospect that many of the new donors it attracted for the tariff fight will not remain.
Albrecht, who leads the organization, said she was unable to persuade the group’s most conservative donors that challenging Trump’s trade policy was the right thing to do, and many stopped giving before the Supreme Court even heard the case.
“I couldn’t convince them that this was the right thing to do,” Albrecht said.
The Liberty Justice Center had a sterling conservative pedigree before the tariff case. It was best known for winning a landmark 2018 Supreme Court ruling that found it unconstitutional to force nonunion government employees to pay union fees. More recently, it sued a division of Pennsylvania State University over its diversity, equity and inclusion policy on behalf of a teacher passed over for a promotion.
The tariff litigation absorbed the group’s typical annual budget. Albrecht said the organization received not a single dollar from any corporation to help pay for the $3.5 million fight. Large importers stood to receive a windfall if the tariffs were struck down, but when Albrecht reached out to companies including Costco seeking donations, she was turned down.
“Our company’s nonprofit donations are focused on education and health efforts, which would not include litigation matters of the type you are pursuing,” Costco’s general counsel wrote in response, according to Albrecht. Costco did not respond to a request for comment.
Big businesses are particularly sensitive to reputational risk and have largely taken a conciliatory approach to the Trump administration in the president’s second term, the Wall Street Journal reported. Many large companies have donated to favored administration projects, rolled back controversial diversity initiatives and avoided directly challenging Trump’s policies in court. Trump’s executive orders targeting law firms whose work he opposed — some specifically for working on cases against his administration — underscored the risks of taking the White House on in litigation.
Mike Barr, a novelty-socks wholesaler and self-described moderate Democrat, sent a small donation to the Liberty Justice Center after it filed its first tariff lawsuit in April 2025. Barr said he spent $100,000 in tariffs directly and lost an additional $600,000 in sales when a retailer cut its order because of the levies.
“What do they say, the enemy of your enemy is your friend,” Barr said.
Barr said he understood why big companies were reluctant to upset the administration but expressed frustration with business organizations whose mission is to advocate for the interests of the business community.
“I’m more angry at the Chamber of Commerce,” Barr said. “Why did they leave this to an organization like Liberty Justice Center?”
The Chamber of Commerce decided not to take legal action when Trump’s levies were first imposed because it thought the tariffs would just be reapplied under a separate statute, according to a person familiar with the group’s thinking. The chamber did file an amicus brief at the Supreme Court supporting the center’s arguments.
The government has approved nearly $24 billion in refunds so far, with most of the money going to large importers. The Justice Department is appealing a court order requiring across-the-board refunds regardless of whether an importer has sued for its money back. In the short term, the Liberty Justice Center was able to make up for the donor losses with a boost in funding from existing benefactors and contributions from new donors, but Albrecht said those new donors “probably won’t come back.”
Meanwhile, a new legal front has opened over the temporary 10% tariffs the Trump administration placed on goods after the Supreme Court threw out the earlier program. A federal appeals court last week said the government could keep collecting those levies while litigation is ongoing. Again, it was Albrecht’s group that brought the case.
“It’s certainly the most important work I’ve ever done and I think a lot of our team feels that way,” Albrecht said.