Ex-Judges Urge Kathleen Williams To Reopen Trump IRS Case Over Possible Fraud

President Donald Trump, his two eldest sons and the Trump Organization abruptly dropped a $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service on May 18, after the case was based on leaks of their tax information by an ex-IRS employee in 2019 and 2020.

“President Donald Trump's recently dismissed $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service should be reopened so the judge who oversaw it can investigate "whether a fraud occurred," 35 former federal judges argued Wednesday”

CNBC

Federal Judge Kathleen Williams of Miami District Court dismissed the case with prejudice and noted the move canceled an upcoming deadline related to her efforts to scrutinize the matter, while also saying the plaintiffs made no reference to a settlement and that the defendants did not submit any settlement documents.

CNBC

The same day, the Department of Justice announced that, as part of a settlement agreement, the U.S. attorney general will establish a $1.776 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund," and one day later DOJ revealed an addendum that effectively shielded the plaintiffs and certain affiliates from any IRS enforcement regarding their past tax returns.

Thirty-five former federal judges then argued in a Wednesday court filing that the case should be reopened so Williams can investigate "whether a fraud occurred," and they urged the court to "set aside the judgment in this lawsuit" to resume inquiry into whether there was an actual underlying case or controversy.

The 35 judges said the settlement was "a product of collusion and is itself a fraud on the Court," and they asked Williams to reopen the proceeding so she could look into whether she "was deceived, including with respect to the existence of an underlying case or controversy."

CNN reported that Natalie Baldassarre, a spokesperson for the Justice Department, said in a statement Wednesday that "it is a routine move for plaintiffs to dismiss cases without referencing any settlement," adding, "This motion is frivolous and there is nothing improper about this agreement."

CNN

In Dallas News, the creation of the $1.7 billion “anti-weaponization fund” was framed by columnist writing as a threat to the nation’s civic character, with the author arguing, "I believe it is about loyalty. Dangerous loyalty."

That same Dallas News piece warned that critics fear the fund could open the door for payouts to Jan. 6, 2021 rioters, political operatives and extremists who attacked democratic institutions while claiming they were victims, and it cited the Capitol attack as a reference point for the argument.

NBC News said the nearly $1.8 billion in restitution the Trump administration intends to disburse has drawn interest from people who say they are victims of a weaponized justice system, including "high-profile presidential allies" and those "far from the political limelight."

“On May 18, the Trump administration announced the creation of a $1”

Dallas News

CNN reported that three lawsuits were brought last week in federal courts in Washington, DC, and Virginia seeking to halt implementation of the fund, with arguments that it may dole out money to people who participated in the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol and finance various paramilitary organizations in the country.

Reason Magazine described the Anti-Weaponization Fund as a taxpayer-funded arrangement, writing that the administration is relying on "extremely weak legal arguments" and that the disbursement is "a massive taxpayer-funded slush fund that Trump will be able to distribute to his friends and allies."

In the same Reason account, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche was quoted saying "Previous cases have been settled on similar terms," as the article compared the fund to Keepseagle v. Vilsack and noted that in Keepseagle the Obama administration settled by providing $680 million in direct compensation plus $80 million in loan forgiveness.