US district judge rebukes Trump in suit against IRS – JURIST

A judge for the US District Court for the Southern District of Florida severely criticized President Donald Trump and his lawyers in a ruling on his lawsuit seeking damages from the IRS, saying it was filed for “an improper purpose — to gain the imprimatur of judicial legitimacy for a “settlement” that had no solid basis in law or fact.

The lawsuit was settled with an agreement for a $1.776 billion fund to compensate the president’s allies and immunity from tax audits for the president and his family. The fund has been around ever since abandoned.

Judge Kathleen Williams said federal courts are required to have jurisdiction Article III of the Constitution, which establishes the judiciary. She noted that Trump is in charge of the executive branch, which includes the IRS, and that “closer examination reveals that a justifiable case or controversy is lacking; Plaintiffs and Defendants are not adversaries because one side controls this litigation. . . . In reaching this conclusion, the Court determines that Plaintiffs improperly used this particular lawsuit to justify litigation.”

Williams determined that the suit lacked prejudice, in part, through Acting Attorney General Blanche’s “apparent ability to speak on behalf of both plaintiffs and defendants, to sign a “settlement” document on behalf of all parties to this action, and then to reject part of that settlement, (which) shows that there was only one party represented in this entire case whose interests were represented.” She also said the Court was “extremely troubled” by some of Blanche’s testimony, which she called “provisionally accurate (but) at best, misleading and, at worst, disingenuous.”

Judge Williams added:

Whether Executive Branch actors can privately agree to grant themselves and their former clients blanket immunity and billions of dollars in taxpayer money for statutorily undetermined complaints was never an issue presented to this Court. The question is whether the Parties can do this by claiming to be adverse and including the legitimacy of a judicial process. The answer is a resounding “no”… The very nature of the lawsuit and the conduct of the parties and counsel… make it clear that this was an attempt to use the Court to lend some legitimacy to an agreement to grant immunity to people and entities associated with the President and to appropriate billions of American taxpayer dollars to remedy grievances not defined in the laws.

Williams continued REFER Trump’s lawyer, Alejandro Brito, who filed the lawsuit, about possible disciplinary action from the Florida state bar. Another Trump lawyer, Daniel Epstein, is now barred from appearing in the Southern District of Florida for a year.