{"id":483,"date":"2026-08-06T13:09:27","date_gmt":"2026-08-06T13:09:27","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=483"},"modified":"2026-08-06T13:09:27","modified_gmt":"2026-08-06T13:09:27","slug":"tariff-refunds-reach-100-billion-mark","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=483","title":{"rendered":"Tariff refunds reach $100 billion mark"},"content":{"rendered":"

The U.S. Senate confirmed Sonia Sotomayor\u2019s nomination to the Supreme Court on this day in 2009 on a 68-31 vote.<\/p>

Read more The justices should hold regular press conferences<\/a><\/p>

At the Court<\/h2>

Last week, the Trump administration asked the Supreme Court on its emergency docket to clear the way for the implementation of President Donald Trump\u2019s executive order on mail-in voting. Twelve states \u2013 led by Alabama \u2013 later echoed this request in their own application. On Monday, the group of 23 states and the District of Columbia challenging the order the court to deny these requests. The matter is now fully briefed, and the court\u2019s ruling could come at any time.<\/p><\/div><\/div>

On Tuesday, the court released its calendar for the .<\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

Morning Reads<\/h2>

Trump admin refunds $100 billion in \u2018liberation day\u2019 tariffs<\/h3>

Kevin Breuninger, CNBC<\/p>

In a Tuesday in the U.S. Court of International Trade, the Trump administration shared that \u201cit has refunded about $100 billion of the tariff revenue that was collected before President Donald Trump\u2019s \u2018liberation day\u2019 duties were struck down by the Supreme Court,\u201d according to CNBC. That figure \u201crepresents about 60% of the roughly $166 billion the government says it raked in from the sweeping tariffs Trump imposed in 2025.\u201d Approximately $29 billion in additional refund requests \u201chave been accepted for processing\u201d and are awaiting action from the administration.<\/p><\/div><\/div>

Court confirms that temporary deportation protections for Haitians are no longer in place<\/h3>

Devan Cole, Priscilla Alvarez, and Tami Luhby, CNN<\/p>

On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes \u201cofficially allowed the Trump administration to end temporary deportation protection for hundreds of thousands of Haitians, marking the final step, for now, in a months-long case that made its way to the Supreme Court,\u201d according to CNN. In a brief order, Reyes explained that her decision barring the Department of Homeland Security from ending Haitians\u2019 participation in the Temporary Protected Status program \u201cis no longer in effect.\u201d CNN noted that \u201c[t]he order puts to bed a lingering question that had caused confusion among the roughly 350,000 Haitians benefiting from the program. Following the Supreme Court\u2019s decision in late June\u201d stating \u201cthat federal courts do not have the power to review challenges to the Homeland Security secretary\u2019s decision to end TPS\u201d \u201cit remained unclear when, exactly, the protections would be officially gone.\u201d<\/p><\/div><\/div>

Mississippi lawmakers launch redistricting process after Supreme Court ruling<\/h3>

Taylor Vance, Mississippi Today<\/p>

On Monday, Mississippi lawmakers \u201ctook the first steps toward potentially redrawing Mississippi\u2019s legislative, congressional and judicial districts in the wake of the U.S. Supreme Court\u2019s landmark Louisiana v. Callais decision that weakened minority voting protections,\u201d according to Mississippi Today. The Joint Redistricting and Reapportionment Committee \u201cwill solicit input from voters in eight different areas of the state over the next two months on how the districts should be redrawn in light of the Callais decision.\u201d Voting rights activists who spoke with Mississippi Today said they \u201cworry the hearings are merely a fa\u00e7ade, and lawmakers have already made up their mind to dismantle majority Black districts.\u201d<\/p><\/div><\/div>

This federal judge ruled against Trump. Then the threats began.<\/h3>

Joanna Slater, The Washington Post<\/svg><\/span><\/p>

The Washington Post profiled U.S. District Judge John McConnell, who, like other federal judges across the country who have ruled against the Trump administration, is navigating \u201ca wave of threats unlike anything\u201d he has previously experienced. Since the beginning of last year, McConnell has \u201creceived credible death threats. A MAGA activist doxed his daughter. Two Republicans in Congress started impeachment proceedings against him. An insurance company even canceled McConnell\u2019s homeowner\u2019s policy (the insured party was too risky, the firm indicated, with an attached link to one impeachment effort).\u201d The Washington Post noted that \u201cMcConnell\u2019s experience is not unique. In recent years, federal judges and Supreme Court justices have faced increasing risks to their safety.\u201d McConnell told the Post that \u201che was heartened by statements by Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr., who has said criticism of judges as individuals \u2013 rather than of their rulings \u2013 is \u2018not appropriate.\u2019\u201d<\/p><\/div><\/div>

Is Trump\u2019s New Tariff Lever IEEPA 2.0?<\/h3>

Ilya Somin, The Dispatch<\/p>

In late July, President Donald Trump \u201cused Section 301 of the Trade Act of 1974 to impose massive new tariffs on 60 U.S. trading partners, including the European Union, Canada, Australia, Japan, South Korea, and more.\u201d In a column for The Dispatch, Ilya Somin compared these new tariffs to those tariffs imposed under the International Emergency Economic Powers Act and struck down by the Supreme Court in February. \u201cUnlike IEEPA, Section 301 does authorize tariffs. But it sets limits that Trump\u2019s policy blatantly transgresses,\u201d Somin argued. \u201cIt is important that the courts continue to hold the line by striking down presidential tariff power grabs.\u201d<\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

On Site<\/h2>
From the SCOTUSblog Team<\/span>

What does the Trump administration want from the Supreme Court next?<\/h3>

By Kelsey Dallas<\/p>

Last week, the federal government joined President Donald Trump\u2019s personal legal team in asking the Supreme Court to review an $83.3 million defamation judgment against the president. That\u2019s far from the only notable petition for review from the Trump administration pending before the court this summer.<\/p><\/div>

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>
SCOTUS Outside Opinions<\/span>

The justices should hold regular press conferences <\/h3>

By Josh Blackman<\/p>

For his series on what the Supreme Court can do better, Josh Blackman wrote about why Supreme Court justices should hold regular press conferences. \u201cBy allowing the American people to hear the justices in their own words, such press conferences would actually promote the court\u2019s perception as an institution, without changing a single word of an opinion,\u201d according to Blackman.<\/p><\/div>

\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n<\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

Podcasts<\/h2>
Amarica’s Constitution<\/span>

Dobbs and Bruen Plus Time<\/h3>

Akhil Amar and Andy Lipka continue making their way through the 20 most constitutionally significant cases of the Roberts court and discuss Dobbs v. Jackson Women\u2019s Health Organization and New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen, two cases that have continued to have resonance with the American people and with the justices.<\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>

A Closer Look<\/div>

United States v. Hembree<\/h3><\/div>

The Supreme Court appears to be in its Second Amendment era. During the 2025-26 term, it decided two gun rights cases, striking down a Hawaii law requiring concealed-carry permit holders to receive express permission from property owners before bringing a gun onto private property that\u2019s open to the public and barring the government from prosecuting a Texas man who regularly used marijuana on charges that he violated a federal law prohibiting users of illegal drugs from having a gun. And on June 30, the court took up a significant Second Amendment case, on Americans\u2019 right to own AR-15s and similar semiautomatic rifles. That case will likely be argued in the fall.<\/p>

Read more What does the Trump administration want from the Supreme Court next?<\/a><\/p>

Soon, the Supreme Court will confront yet another pressing gun rights question when it considers a petition for review focused on 18 U.S.C. \u00a7 922(g)(1), the federal statute that prohibits an individual who has been convicted of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a year or more from owning a gun. The federal courts of appeals are divided over whether the \u201cfelon in possession\u201d statute, as it is commonly known, satisfies the Second Amendment as applied to all felons convicted of such a crime or if it is unconstitutional as applied to felons convicted of certain nonviolent felonies.<\/p>

The case began in 2022, when Charles Hembree was charged with violating 922(g)(1). He was covered by the statute because, four years earlier, he had been convicted of possession of methamphetamine. Hembree filed a motion to dismiss the indictment, contending that the felon in possession statute was unconstitutional as applied to him. After a federal district court denied his motion, Hembree accepted a plea agreement under which he retained the right to appeal the court\u2019s decision on the motion. He was sentenced to six months of imprisonment, followed by three years of supervised release.<\/p>

Hembree then asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit to review the district court\u2019s decision on his motion to dismiss, again contending that the felon in possession statute violates the Second Amendment as applied to him. The federal appellate court it was unconstitutional after applying the \u201chistory and tradition\u201d framework outlined by the Supreme Court in 2022\u2019s New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen<\/em>, which requires considering whether the challenged regulation \u201cis consistent with the Nation\u2019s historical tradition of firearm regulation.\u201d Rejecting the government\u2019s argument that laws addressing drug possession are comparable to early laws targeting possession of contraband, such as a stolen horse, and that disarming Hembree is comparable to early Americans\u2019 effort to disarm \u201cdangerous individuals,\u201d the 5th Circuit held \u201cthat the government did not meet its burden to prove that history and tradition support simple possession as a valid felony predicate under \u00a7922(g)(1).\u201d<\/p>

In April, the government . But rather than ask the justices to take up the case for argument and resolve the circuit split over the felon in possession statute, it asked them to hold the petition for review until they decided United States v. Hemani<\/em>, the Second Amendment case on the Texas man who regularly uses marijuana, which centered on a different piece of the same law: 922(g)(3). \u201cIf appropriate,\u201d wrote U.S. Solicitor General D. John Sauer, \u201cthe Court should … grant certiorari in this case, vacate the court of appeals\u2019 judgment, and remand the case for further consideration in light of Hemani<\/em>.\u201d<\/p>

Just under two months after the government filed the petition for review, the court handed down Hemani<\/em>. Writing for the majority, Justice Neil Gorsuch specifically that it did not address the felon in possession statute. Hembree highlights \u201cthe narrow nature\u201d of the ruling in his responding to the petition, asserting that \u201cHemani<\/em> does not affect the outcome here.\u201d He urges the justices to deny the petition, noting that they denied three other petitions concerning this same statute brought by the government in recent months.<\/p>

Indeed, in addition to those three earlier petitions from the government on the felon in possession statute, the court this year has denied several petitions addressing the statute filed by defendants. United States v. Hembree<\/em> is expected to be considered by the justices for the first time at their \u201clong conference\u201d on Sept. 28, and we should know sometime in October if this denial streak will continue.<\/p><\/div><\/div>

SCOTUS Quote<\/h2>

JUSTICE ALITO: \u201cAnd what if it was put on the license place? Would that be a technical trespass? Is that the property of the driver?\u201d<\/p>

MR. LECKAR: \u201cWell, a license plate, as I understand it, is the property of the State, and driving is a privilege. But it’s not a technical trespass in this particular case. Mr. Jones had the \u2013\u201d<\/p>

JUSTICE SCALIA: \u201cIs that right? I don’t own my license plate? I didn’t know that. How do you know that?\u201d<\/p>

(Laughter.)<\/p>

JUSTICE SCALIA: \u201cHow do you know that? I paid for my license plate.\u201d<\/p>

(Laughter.)<\/p>

JUSTICE KENNEDY: \u201cWe don’t need to get into it, but \u2018Live Free or Die\u2019 was spelled on the license plate.\u201d<\/p>

Read more The October argument session<\/a><\/p>

\u2014 \u00a0(2011)<\/p><\/div><\/div><\/div><\/div>","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Plus, a judge confirmed on Wednesday that TPS for Haitians has ended.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":17,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[23,5,4],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-483","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-amaricas-constitution","category-from-the-scotusblog-team","category-newsletter"],"yoast_head":"\nTariff refunds reach $100 billion mark - American Service Review<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=483\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Tariff refunds reach $100 billion mark - American Service Review\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Plus, a judge confirmed on Wednesday that TPS for Haitians has ended.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=483\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"American Service Review\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2026-08-06T13:09:27+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/e6403dd24788ce1a34ba6705478378b4.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"2000\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1500\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"9 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=483#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=483\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb\"},\"headline\":\"Tariff refunds reach $100 billion mark\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-06T13:09:27+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=483\"},\"wordCount\":1849,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=483#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg\",\"articleSection\":[\"Amarica's Constitution\",\"From the SCOTUSblog Team\",\"Newsletter\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=483#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=483\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=483\",\"name\":\"Tariff refunds reach $100 billion mark - American Service Review\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=483#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=483#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2026-08-06T13:09:27+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb\"},\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=483#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=483\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=483#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2026\\\/05\\\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg\",\"width\":1200,\"height\":627},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?p=483#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Tariff refunds reach $100 billion mark\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/\",\"name\":\"American Service Review\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/americanservicereview.com\\\/?author=1\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Tariff refunds reach $100 billion mark - American Service Review","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=483","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Tariff refunds reach $100 billion mark - American Service Review","og_description":"Plus, a judge confirmed on Wednesday that TPS for Haitians has ended.","og_url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=483","og_site_name":"American Service Review","article_published_time":"2026-08-06T13:09:27+00:00","og_image":[{"width":2000,"height":1500,"url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/06\/e6403dd24788ce1a34ba6705478378b4.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"9 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=483#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=483"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#\/schema\/person\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb"},"headline":"Tariff refunds reach $100 billion mark","datePublished":"2026-08-06T13:09:27+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=483"},"wordCount":1849,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=483#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg","articleSection":["Amarica's Constitution","From the SCOTUSblog Team","Newsletter"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=483#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=483","url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=483","name":"Tariff refunds reach $100 billion mark - American Service Review","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=483#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=483#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg","datePublished":"2026-08-06T13:09:27+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#\/schema\/person\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb"},"breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=483#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=483"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=483#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/05\/803a164f9e7307fb35e1310eb4a0b4fe.jpg","width":1200,"height":627},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?p=483#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Tariff refunds reach $100 billion mark"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/","name":"American Service Review","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/#\/schema\/person\/220bfdac1627513926924476de32dedb","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/50b1ad2e498f523425ee0a8cc5180a210646db1622662a3d56cc405d3e0c346a?s=96&d=mm&r=g","caption":"admin"},"sameAs":["http:\/\/americanservicereview.com"],"url":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/?author=1"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/483","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=483"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/483\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/17"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=483"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=483"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/americanservicereview.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=483"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}