A federal judge criticized the Justice Department on Monday, imposing professional penalties on lawyers representing President Trump in a civil lawsuit against the IRS. U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams concluded that the lawsuit had been filed for an ‘improper purpose.’ In a detailed 56-page decision, she referred Trump’s lawyer, Alejandro Brito, to the Florida Bar for potential disciplinary action. Additionally, Williams restricted Daniel Epstein’s ability to practice in the Southern District of Florida.
Moreover, Williams prohibited the Justice Department, IRS, and Trump from using provisions of a settlement deal as evidence in court or other proceedings. She stated that the case was intended to create a facade of judicial legitimacy for a settlement lacking legal or factual basis. Williams noted, ‘There was never a case or controversy.’
Williams ordered her decision to be sent to relevant bars in New York and the District of Columbia, of which acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward, respectively, are members. Both had signed documents related to the settlement.
Brito and Epstein did not respond to requests for comment. Williams’s ruling followed concerns from 35 former judges about a May settlement agreement that concluded a $10 billion civil lawsuit filed by Trump and his sons against the IRS over leaked tax returns.
The initial settlement included a $1.776 billion ‘anti-weaponization’ fund to support individuals claiming federal government ‘weaponization’ against them. Facing backlash, the Justice Department decided not to proceed with this program, according to Blanche. However, a provision barring the IRS from pursuing tax claims against Trump remains.
Former judges asked Williams to reopen the case, arguing the settlement was ‘collusion’ and a ‘fraud on the court.’ Williams questioned her jurisdiction over the case, noting Trump’s control over the federal agency and officials involved removed any adversaries.
In her order, Williams accused the Justice Department of neglecting its duty to defend U.S. interests zealously, disregarding policies, and achieving unauthorized objectives by law. She asserted that the court was exploited to legitimize an agreement granting immunity and earmarking funds without legal grounds.
Williams, appointed by President Obama, criticized the case as far from ‘ordinary’ and emphasized that public servants, including Trump and his officials, must adhere to legal authority, not manipulate the judicial process. She dismissed the characterization of the $1.776 billion fund as anything but a ‘branding’ effort rather than a deliberative damages calculation.
The ruling came as Blanche prepared for his Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing for Attorney General. He will face scrutiny regarding the ‘anti-weaponization’ fund and the immunity granted to Trump. President Trump recently nominated Blanche, his former private defense attorney, to head the Justice Department.
Leave a Reply