An Appeals Court on 9/29/2026 sided with a Lower Court judge, who determined Trump (R) Colluded with the Department of Justice (DOJ), in bringing and later Dismissing a Case seeking $10 billion in Damages from the IRS.
Florida-based U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams in 7/2026 found that the Lawsuit that served as the Hook for the $1.776 Billion “anti-weaponization” Fund amounted to Collusion, as the Two Parties were never truly Averse. She also Sanctioned Two Trump Attorneys in the Process.
The Trump, who Sued His own Administration in 1/2026 over the Leak of His Tax Returns, Struck an Agreement with the IRS in late 5/2026 to Dismiss the Case, with the DOJ, then creating an “anti-weaponization” Fund to Provide Payments to those who Claim to have been Wronged by the Government.
“The appellants did not submit or offer any evidence to explain their litigation conduct or demonstrate that the lawsuit and the settlement were not collusive. Given the record before us, the appellants have not made a strong showing that the district court committed clear error in its collusion and bad faith findings,” a Three-Judge Panel for the 11th Circuit, wrote in its Opinion 9/29/2026.
Williams’s Ruling was particularly Critical of Trump, noting that the Trump filed the Suit years after the Leak, when He had returned to Office and had the Power to Fire Everyone.
“In sum, the facts before this Court demonstrate there was never adverseness between the Parties; there was never a case or controversy; and there was never a question as to who would prevail,” Williams wrote in the 56-page Filing.
“The Court determines that Plaintiffs improperly employed this lawsuit to justify a particular award in this matter — access to taxpayer funds and exemption from audits and other investigations — which was accomplished by leveraging control over Defendants,” she wrote later, adding at the time that the suit was “brought to manipulate the judicial process.”
Williams found that Trump’s $10 billion Case against the IRS was “brought for an improper purpose, to gain the imprimatur of judicial legitimacy for a ‘settlement’ that had no viable basis in law or fact.”
The Judge, who was Appointed by former President Obama (D), has Prohibited the Trump Administration from Referring to the Litigation around the Case as reaching a Settlement. Such matters must often be Approved before a judge, and the DOJ created the Now-Defunct Compensation Ffund outside of the Court Process.
“The appellants have not persuaded us to construe the sanction more broadly and have not made a strong showing that they will prevail on their First Amendment challenges,” the Appeals Court wrote. “They do not cite any authorities suggesting that a speech-related prohibition imposed as a penalty for conduct determined to be sanctionable violates the First Amendment.”
The Federal Court also Sided with Williams, on the Sanctions for the Two Attorneys, Noting it was within Hir Power to do so.
NYC Wins When Everyone Can Vote! Michael H. Drucker
No comments:
Post a Comment