Former federal judges ask court to reopen Trump IRS case over settlement creating $1.776 billion fund
The Facts
- A group of 35 former federal judges filed a motion asking a federal court in Florida to reopen the dismissed lawsuit between President Donald Trump and the IRS.
- The former judges said the court should investigate whether the out-of-court settlement amounted to fraud on the court because the settlement was not disclosed when the case was withdrawn.
- Trump, two of his adult sons and the Trump Organization had sued the IRS and Treasury Department over leaks of their tax information, and they voluntarily withdrew the case before it was dismissed with prejudice.
- After the case was withdrawn, the Justice Department announced a settlement that included creation of a $1.776 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund."
- Multiple reports say the fund is intended to compensate people who claim they were targeted by the government for political or other improper reasons.
- The settlement has drawn broader scrutiny because it would direct a large sum of federal money through a new compensation program and includes terms related to IRS claims involving Trump.
- U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams dismissed the case after the plaintiffs withdrew it, noting that the filings did not reference a settlement and that no settlement documents were submitted to the court.
- The former judges’ filing is the latest legal challenge to the settlement, and whether the case will be reopened now depends on how the court responds to their motion.
How left and right are reading this
- Both agree
- A settlement announced only after the case was withdrawn created a $1.776 billion compensation fund and now faces a serious court-focused challenge over whether keeping it out of the filings misled the judge who dismissed the suit.
- They split on
- Less a disagreement than a question of emphasis: the unusual scale and public-money design of the new compensation fund, versus the narrower procedural question of whether an undisclosed settlement improperly bypassed the court when the case was withdrawn.
Analytical frames for this storyTap to explore
Context
What was the original lawsuit about?
The lawsuit was brought by Trump, two of his adult sons and the Trump Organization against the IRS and Treasury Department over leaks of their tax information by a former IRS employee or contractor in 2019 and 2020 CNBC,News International,Rolling Out.
Why do the former judges want the case reopened?
They argue the parties withdrew the case without telling the court about a planned settlement and want the judge to examine whether that omission improperly misled the court Aol,USA Today,Court House News Se….
View all 20 sources
Independent coverage (20)
DNyuzTrump's 'slush fund' hits wall as judges hurl fresh fraud cl...
Raw StoryTrump's 'slush fund' hits wall as judges hurl fresh fraud cl...
The News InternationalFormer judges challenge dismissal of Trump's $10 billion IRS...
YahooRetired Judges Call Out Trump's "Unprecedentedly Fraudulent ...
Washington PostEx-federal judges ask court to reopen Trump's IRS lawsuit, p...
Newser35 Ex-Judges Ask Court If Trump's IRS Deal Was Fraud
Aol35 former judges ask court to investigate Trump's deal with ...
CBS NewsDozens of ex-judges push to look into Trump's "anti-weaponiz...
AolEx-judges push to look into "anti-weaponization fund" deal -...
Court House News ServiceFormer judges accuse Trump of deceiving court with fraudulen...
The Detroit News35 former judges ask court to investigate Trump's deal with ...
Rolling OutWhy 35 ex-judges want a judge to reopen Trump's IRS lawsuit
Rolling OutWhy 35 ex-judges want a judge to reopen Trump's IRS lawsuit
CNBCTrump's IRS case should be reopened so court can probe possi...
USA Today35 former judges ask court to investigate Trump's deal with ...
CNN InternationalEx-judges mount bid to upend 'unprecedentedly fraudulent' Tr...
WAAY TV 31Ex-judges mount bid to upend 'unprecedentedly fraudulent' Tr...
NewsChannel 3-12Ex-judges mount bid to upend 'unprecedentedly fraudulent' Tr...
YahooJUST IN: 35 Former Federal Judges File Motion to Reopen Trum...
Raw StoryDozens of ex-federal judges launch bid to kill MAGA slush fu...
About these frames
The Advocate: Liberty, speech, privacy, autonomy, rights, consent, choice. What freedoms are at stake.
The Watchdog: Wrongdoing, responsibility, corruption, transparency. Who knew what, when, and what they did about it.
The Analyst: Costs, jobs, inflation, growth, incentives, markets, tradeoffs. Follow the money.
The Architect: Stability, law, enforcement, institutional design, separation of powers, regulatory process, rule of law. How are order and governance maintained?
The Guardian: Sanctity, degradation, bodily autonomy, moral boundaries, human dignity, bioethics, environmental purity. Where are the lines that should not be crossed?
See this differently than someone you know would? Two ways to keep it going.
The dial works on any URL — paste an article you read elsewhere this week.