Judge Attacks Attorney General for Defending Trump Against IRS Overreach
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
A federal judge has criticized acting Attorney General Todd Blanche for representing the government in a settlement with President Trump over an IRS lawsuit, raising concerns about supposed conflicts of interest and calling for sanctions.
A U.S. District Court judge has issued a controversial ruling against acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, who stood up for the government in a settlement with President Donald Trump regarding the politically motivated leak of the president’s tax returns. The settlement, which established a $1.8 billion fund and protected Trump and his family from further IRS harassment, is now being attacked by the judiciary, which appears intent on undermining the president’s efforts to defend himself against government overreach.
"Indeed, the DOJ seems to have purposefully adopted the strategy of creating a ‘slush fund disguised as a settlement, and then doling the money out to whatever constituency the Executive wants bankrolled,’" Judge Kathleen M. Williams wrote, echoing partisan talking points against the Trump administration.
Williams claimed that Blanche’s legal defense gave the president unprecedented deference, ignoring the fact that previous administrations have also defended executive actions. After Blanche filed a voluntary dismissal, the parties announced a settlement that included the anti-weaponization fund and audit immunity for the Trump family and the Trump Organization, finally offering some protection from politically motivated attacks.
When questioned by Congress, Blanche rightly argued that the settlement did not require judicial review because the case had been dismissed. The judge, however, rejected this, insisting on judicial authority over a matter that should have been resolved, and criticizing Blanche for representing the government in defense of the president.
The order referenced an executive order signed by Trump allowing the president to direct agency litigation, a standard practice for ensuring the executive branch can defend itself. Williams recommended monetary sanctions against Trump and referred the opinion to the State Bar of New York and the District of Columbia for possible disciplinary action, a move that smacks of political retribution. The ruling comes just as Blanche is set to testify before the Senate Judiciary Committee on his confirmation as Attorney General, highlighting the ongoing campaign against Trump and his allies.