Trump Is Different
Whether one supports Donald J. Trump or not, his approach as president is notably different, especially when it comes to pardons and commutations. In his first term, Trump issued 143 pardons and 38 commutations, far fewer than Barack Obama. However, in his second term, by June 2025, he had granted clemency to over 1,500 individuals, including those convicted for the January 6th Capitol attack. What stands out is not the number, but the frequency of these pardons, which include both white-collar and drug-related offenses. Alice Johnson, appointed as Pardon Czar, plays a significant role in this process, focusing on individual cases and rehabilitation over political connections.
Democrats Push Back on Trump Pardons
Trump’s pardons have sparked criticism from Democrats, particularly regarding the loss of restitution payments. Critics argue that Trump’s pardons, often granted to political allies and high-profile individuals, have harmed victims by wiping out restitution payments that would have otherwise gone to them or the government. Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-MD) highlighted several examples, including the case of Todd and Julie Chrisley, claiming that Trump’s mass pardons, including those for January 6th felons, canceled $1.3 billion in restitution and fines owed to victims and taxpayers.
However, a closer examination of the restitution process reveals that a significant portion of restitution is never paid, and many of the amounts owed do not accurately reflect the financial losses caused by the crimes. Despite the political outcry, the actual impact of pardons on restitution is overstated, as the enforcement of restitution payments is typically limited, with many offenders unable to pay the full amount.
Restitution Influences Prison Time
Under the Federal Sentencing Guidelines, financial loss plays a crucial role in determining prison sentences for crimes like fraud, theft, and embezzlement. The U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual assigns offense levels based on the amount of financial loss caused by the defendant. Larger losses result in higher offense levels and, consequently, longer sentences. For instance, a defendant who causes a loss of over $25 million will likely face a significantly harsher sentence than one responsible for a much smaller loss.
Additionally, financial loss affects restitution or forfeiture amounts that defendants must pay after serving their sentences. These amounts are often determined at sentencing but can be unclear in their calculation. In the case of high-profile cases like FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried, who was ordered to pay $11 billion in forfeiture, or former Theranos CEO Elizabeth Holmes, who faced $452 million in restitution, the amounts are often unrealistic, as the defendants may never be able to repay such large sums.
Restitution Payback Is Low, Very Low
Research published by George Washington Law School in their report “Debunking Criminal Restitution” reveals that 82% of felony defendants at the state level and about 76% at the federal level are classified as indigent. As a result, many individuals facing restitution lack the financial ability to repay, and those who might are often burdened by legal fees and lost income due to criminal proceedings. Additionally, the barriers individuals face after being released from prison create a cycle of debt that is nearly impossible to break, further hindering their ability to repay restitution.
According to the Government Accountability Office, US Attorneys Offices (USAO) collected $2.95 billion in restitution debt in fiscal years 2014 through 2016. However, at the end of fiscal year 2016, $110 billion in previously ordered restitution remained outstanding, and USAOs identified $100 billion of that outstanding debt as uncollectible due to offenders’ inability to pay.
Corporate criminal restitution make up a large amount of what is collected, not individuals. Department of Justice’s Fraud Section reported a significant increase in corporate restitution in 2024. The section resolved 13 corporate cases, resulting in over $2.3 billion in total monetary recoveries, a 300% increase from the previous year. These cases primarily involved healthcare fraud, securities violations, and procurement fraud. Whereas corporations can move on with a large restitution payment after fraudulent activities, individuals, who face significant incarceration time, cannot.
The Department of Justice’s own website even notes that recovery of full restitution is unlikely, noting on its website, “While defendants may make partial payments toward the full restitution owed, it is rare that defendants are able to fully pay the entire restitution amount owed.” Some have pegged the recovery at around 2% of the amounts due.
What Drove The Restitution Problem
Bill Clinton signed the Mandatory Victims Restitution Act (MVRA) into law on April 24, 1996. The MVRA mandated that federal courts require convicted offenders to pay restitution to their victims, ensuring compensation for financial losses resulting from certain crimes. The MVRA removed judicial discretion, meaning judges could no longer consider a defendant’s ability to pay when determining restitution. As a result, prosecutors often seek maximum restitution, aiming for longer sentences with little expectation of recovery. Offenders end up in lifelong debt, while victims face the false hope of receiving compensation for their losses.
That Democrats are now using the loss of restitution dollars as a push back on Trump seems a bit disingenuous since it was their party who pushed for MVRA. It was also Clinton who signed into law the 1994 Crime Bill, which led to a dramatic increase in prison population through longer prison terms around the country.
Financial Litigation Unit
Although it is housed in the DOJ’s Civil Division, the Financial Litigation Unit’s (FLU) primary function is “to litigate and enforce the collection of criminal and civil debts owed to the United States, including criminal restitution . . . .” The FLU has the power to do so for twenty years from the filing of a judgement, on top of any period of incarceration served. For those owing restitution, it amounts to a life sentence.
For many exiting prison, they are on Supervised Release for up to 5 years where they must report a financial statement each month and are required to pay toward their restitution. FLU monitors these assets, often seeking to place liens on assets such as homes and real estate. They also monitor refunds on tax returns and even garnish up to 25% of social security payments.
The Cases
Dr. Topeka Sam did a prison term for drugs and received a pardon from Trump in 2020. She now heads Ladies of Hope Ministries and has been a tireless advocate for those in prison and those returning to society. Dr. Sam also has taken up the cause of the burden that restitution leaves on those trying to move on with their lives. When I spoke to Dr. Sam, she said it clearly, “We’ve turned too many people into lifelong justice-involved individuals – not because they continue to break the law, but because of the weight of restitution debt that never goes away. Bankruptcy can’t erase it. The only true pathway to relief is a presidential pardon or remission of fines fees and restitution. And when that happens, it’s not just about walking out of prison, it’s about being restored, being given a real second chance at life.”
Tanya Pierce served three years for conspiracy to defraud banks during the mortgage crisis after going to trial. She said that her reason for going to trial was that she believed the amount of loss to the banks was approximately $25,000. In addition to her sentence, she was ordered to pay $2.5 million in restitution, an amount prosecutors said defined her “intent” to steal more. Now free from prison and supervised release, she seeks legislative relief, hoping to find a way to escape the lifelong debt she cannot repay.
Pierce told me, “I’ve been told that my alleged bank victims have never received one dollar of the small amount that I have been able to pay. The FLU is an organization that needs to be shut down and I’m shocked that Trump’s DOGE initiative did not do that.” Pierce is pushing for some sort of amnesty for many who are under unrealistic restitution orders.
Kay Rogers never received any money from the alleged fraud she pled guilty to but felt she had to take a plea to move on with her life. “The government put me in prison for 2 years and then they said I owed $5 million to a bank,” Rogers told me, “now I have a piece of paper from the bank that says I don’t owe them a thing but I still have to pay restitution.” Rogers has a lien on her modest home and her social security is garnished.
Todd Ficeto was once a high-flying investment banker but got involved with a con-man from Germany. Ficeto went to trial and was convicted, resulting in a 6-year prison sentence. Prior to his indictment, he paid over $9 million to avoid prosecution, which represented his entire net worth. Shortly thereafter he was indicted. “I figured I could pay the money, and be able to move on with life since I believed, and still believe, I did nothing wrong.” Out of prison and now on supervised release, Ficeto has no means to pay his $240 million in restitution, a sum he says represents an amount so outrageous that there is no way to ever pay it back. His former partner, Florian Homm, is a fugitive, living in Germany giving financial advice to the public.
Read the full article here
