A federal judge issued a sharply critical ruling Monday against a lawsuit brought by former President Donald Trump and his sons against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) and the Treasury Department, describing the case as a “sham” designed to advance a political agenda rather than a legitimate legal dispute.
U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams, appointed by President Obama in 2010, struck down the $10 billion suit that alleged harm from the 2019 unauthorized leak of Trump’s personal and corporate tax returns. The leak was caused by a third-party contractor who is currently serving a prison sentence. The lawsuit, filed in January, targeted the IRS and Treasury Department, but Williams highlighted the fundamental constitutional flaw underpinning the case: since Trump, as a former president, effectively represented both plaintiff and defendant sides—given that the IRS and Treasury are executive branch agencies—the suit lacked the required adversarial “case or controversy” necessary for federal court jurisdiction.
Williams sharply reprimanded the conduct of the legal team representing the government side, which was led by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, who previously served as Trump’s personal criminal lawyer and is currently a nominee for U.S. attorney general. The judge ordered the case reopened after a controversial settlement announcement in May, which included a government apology, a proposed $1.8 billion fund to compensate victims of alleged government “lawfare,” and grant of immunity from IRS audits for Trump and his sons. The settlement stirred bipartisan backlash and was quickly rescinded by Blanche.
In her ruling, Williams called the lawsuit “filed in bad faith for the improper purpose of dishonestly advancing a political narrative,” and described the litigation as “non-adversarial, collusive, and jurisdictionally improper.” She noted that Blanche’s role, which included speaking for both sides of the lawsuit and then repudiating parts of the settlement, underlined the absence of genuine legal conflict. Williams found Blanche’s testimony to Congress about the settlement “misleading and, at worst, disingenuous," emphasizing that the entire matter was orchestrated to serve Trump’s “pattern of misusing the courts to serve political purposes.”
The ruling has led to calls for professional discipline. More than 100 former federal and state judges submitted a 73-page ethics complaint to the New York State Bar against Blanche, citing not only his conduct in this case but also his handling of other high-profile matters, including the prosecution of former FBI Director James Comey, the management of Jeffrey Epstein-related files, and actions against the Southern Poverty Law Center. The complaint alleges Blanche prioritizes personal loyalty to Trump over impartial justice.
Blanche has denied any wrongdoing and dismissed the complaint as politically motivated. During his Senate confirmation hearing, he declined to directly answer whether Trump is “above the law,” stating he was “not aware of what it means to be ‘above the law.’”
The judge’s ruling underscores ongoing concerns about the intersection of law and politics in recent high-profile cases and raises ethical questions about Blanche’s fitness to serve as the nation’s chief federal prosecutor.