35 Former Judges Seek to Reopen Trump IRS Case Over $1.776 Billion Fund
Updated
Updated · Raw Story · May 27
35 Former Judges Seek to Reopen Trump IRS Case Over $1.776 Billion Fund
7 articles · Updated · Raw Story · May 27
Thirty-five former federal judges asked a Miami court to reopen Trump v. IRS and void a settlement that created a $1.776 billion “Anti-Weaponization” fund.
Their filing says the case had already been dismissed with prejudice when the Justice Department later announced a settlement that was never presented to the court, meaning the judge was deceived.
Trump had sued the IRS for $10 billion over alleged failures to protect his tax records after a whistleblower disclosed return information; the judges argue Rule 60 allows the court to set aside that judgment.
The challenge lands as the fund has become politically toxic, with the Justice Department insisting it is open to all “lawfare” victims even as some Republicans weigh curbing it.
Can a legal deal grant permanent tax immunity and create a massive compensation fund without any court's oversight?
How can a $1.8 billion fund be created from a dismissed lawsuit without congressional approval or judicial review?
Judicial Uproar Over $1.8 Billion Trump IRS Settlement: Legal, Political, and Constitutional Fallout
Overview
A major controversy has erupted after 35 former federal judges asked Judge Kathleen Williams to reopen the IRS settlement with former President Donald Trump. The settlement, which was reached without government attorneys contesting the lawsuit or even formally appearing in court, granted Trump and his allies extraordinary benefits, including a $1.8 billion fund and significant tax advantages. This lack of legal challenge has raised serious concerns about whether the process protected the public interest and whether judicial scrutiny was thorough, fueling allegations that the settlement process may have been undermined and prompting widespread calls for re-examination.