Trump Lawyers Sanctioned
Federal Judge Rules Trump's IRS Settlement Improper, Sanctions Attorneys for Deceptive Conduct
Key Points
Judge Kathleen Williams restricted Daniel Epstein’s ability to practice in the Southern District of Florida, adding a bar on broader participation in the case.
The court barred the DOJ, the IRS and Mr. Trump from citing or using provisions of the settlement in judicial, administrative, regulatory or other proceedings.
The decision followed a push from 35 former federal judges urging the judge to reopen the case, signaling heightened scrutiny of the deal.
The order directed disciplinary referrals to New York and District of Columbia bars, targeting members of the Trump legal team (Todd Blanche and Stanley Woodward Jr.).
The settlement’s anti-weaponization fund was nearly $1.8 billion (with outlets citing $1.776 billion or $1.766 billion in different reports) and was ultimately abandoned after bipartisan opposition.
A federal judge has ruled that Donald Trump's lawsuit against the IRS was filed for an "improper purpose" and used to push through a controversial $1.8 billion settlement. U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams sanctioned Trump's private attorneys, referred one to the Florida Bar, and barred another from practicing in the Southern District of Florida, according to CBS News and Axios.
The settlement had created an "anti-weaponization fund" — a $1.776 billion pool of taxpayer money meant to compensate Trump allies and shield them from IRS audits. That fund was later abandoned after bipartisan opposition. The court has also barred the DOJ, the IRS, and Trump from citing any part of the settlement in future legal proceedings, Axios reported.
Judge Finds Lawsuit Was a Cover for Improper Deal
Judge Williams found that Trump's $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS was not a real legal fight. Instead, it was a vehicle to give a back-room settlement the appearance of court approval. The judge said the case was used to grant Trump audit immunity and funnel taxpayer money to his allies, according to CBS News.
The court found the government ignored standard DOJ policies and departed from its normal legal posture. The settlement conferred immunity on Trump allies for grievances not defined under any law. The judge said the deal tried to use the court as a rubber stamp, Axios reported.
Attorneys Sanctioned, Referred to Bar Authorities
Judge Williams ordered disciplinary referrals for Todd Blanche and Stanley Woodward Jr. to the New York and District of Columbia bars. She also restricted attorney Daniel Epstein from participating in the case and barred him from pro hac vice admission — a legal term for permission to practice in a court outside one's home state — in the Southern District of Florida, according to CBS News.
The judge cited deceptive and self-serving conduct by the attorneys. One was referred to the Florida Bar for further review. KOCO reported that Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche officially halted the anti-weaponization fund after the ruling drew scrutiny, though he has declined to comment on the sanctions themselves.
Former Judges and Congress Push Back on the Deal
The ruling followed pressure from 35 former federal judges who urged Judge Williams to reopen the case. Their push signaled rare and heightened scrutiny of the settlement from within the legal community itself. Bipartisan opposition in Congress had already forced the administration to back away from the $1.776 billion fund before the ruling came down, WLKY reported.
The White House and federal prosecutors declined to comment on the decision. Multiple outlets described the ruling as a sharp rebuke of Trump's legal strategy and a warning to attorneys in high-profile political cases.
What Happens Next as Bar Reviews Continue
Bar authorities in New York, Washington D.C., and Florida are now reviewing the conduct of the attorneys named in the order. The court's ban on using the settlement in any judicial, administrative, or regulatory proceeding effectively kills the deal's legal power going forward, according to Axios.
The broader investigation into how the settlement was structured remains ongoing. The ruling sets a precedent that courts will not quietly approve deals designed to benefit one party outside of normal legal processes, CBS News reported.
Sentiment
Mostly NegativePublishers
82
Articles
649
Reach
731
