A group of 35 former federal judges asked a court Wednesday to reopen a legal dispute between President Trump and the federal government that was settled by creating a controversial $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization fund,” calling the deal potentially fraudulent.
The legal filing adds to growing criticism of the settlement deal, which the Justice Department announced last week to resolve a lawsuit from the president accusing the Internal Revenue Service of allowing his tax returns to leak. At the center of the deal is a multibillion-dollar fund that would pay people who allege they were victimized by government “weaponization,” and a promise that the IRS will not pursue claims against the president based on prior tax returns.
The judge who oversaw the lawsuit — U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams — had signaled last month she planned to look into whether a lawsuit between Mr. Trump and his own administration would be legally valid. She said she needed to assess whether the issue was truly a “case or controversy” between two adversaries, as required by the Constitution.Â
Before fully looking into that issue, Williams granted a request from lawyers for the president and the government to dismiss the case. The settlement deal was announced on the same day.
Now, dozens of retired judges are arguing Williams should set aside her dismissal. The group includes former appellate Judge J. Michael Luttig, a well-known conservative jurist who has been critical of Mr. Trump, and former U.S. District Judges Nancy Gertner and Shira Scheindlin.
Reopening the case, the judges wrote, 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.”
The retired judges wrote that the settlement deal is “a product of collusion and is itself a fraud on the Court.” They also noted that Williams’ order closing the case said “there is no settlement of record” — which the former jurists argued means Williams was “deceived.”
“The parties here dismissed this case before the Court could complete its inquiry into whether there was an actual case or controversy, and then cited their ‘settlement’ of this case as the legal justification for looting the federal treasury of $1.776 billion,” Wednesday’s filing reads.
The group of retired judges argued that Williams has the power to set aside a judgment in instances of “fraud.”
The attempt to reopen the case follows more than a week of controversy generated by the settlement deal and the “anti-weaponization fund.” Congressional Democrats have cast it as a “slush fund” that could funnel money to Mr. Trump’s allies, and a growing number of Republicans have expressed public and private qualms about the fund, including whether it could be used to pay out convicted Jan. 6 rioters who were pardoned by Mr. Trump last year.
The Justice Department has defended the fund, arguing there are no partisan requirements for people to apply and decisions will be made by a five-person board appointed by the attorney general.
In a statement on Thursday about the ex-judges’ filing, a Justice Department spokesperson said: “It is a routine move for plaintiffs to dismiss cases without referencing any settlement. This motion is frivolous and there is nothing improper about this agreement.”
