President Donald Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS over unauthorized disclosures of his tax returns has hit a wall due to tough questions from the judge.
The legal battle centers on the unauthorized disclosure of his tax returns by former IRS contractor Charles “Chase” Littlejohn, who leaked data to The New York Times and ProPublica between 2018 and 2020.
During Friday’s hearing, a federal judge questioned the president’s power to sue the federal government, which is set out in the Constitution.
Judge’s main arguments
US District Court Judge Kathleen Williams asked Trump’s personal lawyers and Justice Department lawyers representing the IRS to consider some serious constitutional questions because under the US legal system the courts only have jurisdiction over “adversarial disputes”. In such disputes, the two parties actually mean to fight each other.
As to the judge’s arguments, how can this legal battle be legitimate when President Trump effectively controls both sides? As President, he oversees the Justice Department and the Treasury Department, which are tasked with protecting the IRS.
“Although President Trump does not agree that he is bringing this lawsuit in his personal capacity, he is the sitting President and his designated adversaries are entities whose decisions are subject to his direction,” Williams wrote in the four-page order.
Williams said, “Typically, adversary is found in a situation where one party is asserting a right and the other party is objecting. As a result, if there is no adversary, there is no case or dispute.”
There is another complication when it comes to the nature of the plaintiff in the case. Trump is not the only plaintiff. His sons Eric and Donald Jr. and a company that controls much of the family business empire are also involved in the IRS lawsuit.
Based on these arguments, the judge ordered both parties to provide better explanations by May 20 to clarify “whether any case and dispute exists”. The hearing on this case will be held on May 27 in Miami.
The judge’s intervention came after both sides had earlier requested a 90-day break to resolve the matter.
potential impact
The concerns raised by the judge represent a significant hurdle that could derail the case before it even reaches a jury or a final settlement.
If the lawsuit fails to justify the “adverse” requirement, it is possible that the case could be dismissed outright. Therefore, Trump cannot win damages.
If the judge grants a 90-day pause, the parties are allowed to move forward with a settlement. But the move will subject both parties to public and congressional scrutiny.
