WASHINGTON — A bipartisan group of 35 federal judges asked a federal court in Florida to reopen the legal case betweenPresident Donald Trumpand the Internal Revenue Service and investigate whether the two parties' out-of-court settlement was an act of fraud against the court.
In a May 27 court filing, the ex-judges contend Trump and co-plaintiffs failed to mention a planned settlement in their motion to withdraw the lawsuit against the IRS. In exchange for Trump voluntarily withdrawing the lawsuit, the Justice Department last week agreed to createa much-criticized $1.766 billion "anti-weaponization" fundthat could funnel payments to Trump's political allies.
"The Court was deceived," the 24-page motion reads, adding that the settlement "commandeers the contrived sum of $1.776 billion from the United States Treasury, to be handed out to recipients chosen by a commission effectively controlled by the President."
More:Trump digs in over $1.8 billion 'anti-weaponization' fund amid GOP backlash
Trump effectively sued the government that he leads when hefiled suit against the IRS and Treasury Department in Januaryseeking $10 billion in damages over the agency's past leak of his tax returns.
Voluntarily withdrawing the lawsuit meant the judge assigned to the case, U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams, did not rule on the case's merits ‒ nor did the judge weigh in on the settlement that plaintiffs reached with Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, Trump's former personal attorney.
"The purported 'settlement' that the parties never placed before this Court raises profound questions about the parties’ candor toward the Court and manipulation of the judicial system, which threatens to undermine confidence in the administration of justice," the 35 former judges said in their motion.
They said reopening the case would allow the court to "commence an inquiry into whether the Court was deceived, including with respect to the existence of an underlying case or controversy and any purported arms-length negotiations undertaken to resolve it."
Settlement was not 'legally justified,' ex-judges say
Among the former judges asking the court to reopen the case is former U.S. District Court Judge Michael Luttig, a prominent conservative judge who was one of the star witnesses of the House January 6 Select Committee hearings.
Although none of the ex-judges are parties in the suit, theycited a federal rule of civil procedurewhereby a federal court can set aside a judgment over fraud against the court.
Advertisement
More:Why Trump’s $1.776 billion 'anti-weaponization' fund has caused such a stir
"To be clear, the parties’ settlement was not, and never will be, legally justified," the motion reads, arguing Blanche wrongfully invoked the AG's authorities to award judgments and compromise settlements when he created the anti-weaponization fund. "Both of those authorities require the existence of a legitimate litigation and not, as here, one that is collusive, feigned, or fraudulent."
The agreement with the IRS also includesa guarantee that the tax agency will no longerpursue any claims over tax liabilitiesit may have against Trump, his family members and his companies.
Trump and his administration have faced intense bipartisan criticism over the anti-weaponization fund, which has few guardrails over the distribution of funds.
Blanche has said anyone is welcome to apply for compensation, yet the fund was conceived to pay individuals whom Trump and others say were unfairly targeted by prosecutors in past Democratic administrations. Blanche and other administration officials have not ruled out checks going to the nearly 1,600 Trump supporters who violently stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, including those convicted of assaulting police officers.
More:Jan. 6 police officers sue to block Trump's $1.8B 'slush fund' for 'insurrectionists'
A five-person committee, with each member appointed by Blanche, will be in charge of deciding which complainants are rewarded money from the fund, according to the Justice Department.
Two police officers who defended the U.S. Capitol during the Jan. 6 attacksued the Trump administration in a bidto block the anti-weaponization fund.
Trump has defended the fund amid the backlash, writing last week on Truth Social that he is "helping others, who were so badly abused by an evil, corrupt, and weaponized Biden Administration, receive, at long last, JUSTICE!"
Reach Joey Garrison on X @joeygarrison.
This article originally appeared on USA TODAY:35 former judges ask court to investigate Trump's deal with IRS