Attorney General Raoul Urges Court Review Of Manufactured Settlement Agreement, Corrupt Use Of Legal System In Trump V. IRS
Coalition of attorneys general file amicus brief alleging the agreement in Trump v. IRS was collusive and should face close judicial review.
CHICAGO – Attorney General Kwame Raoul, as part of a coalition of 23 attorneys general, today filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida to carefully scrutinize the parties’ conduct and claimed settlement agreement in Trump v. IRS.
Get The Latest News!
Don't miss our top stories and need-to-know news everyday in your inbox.
In the brief, Raoul and the coalition argue the lawsuit and subsequent settlement were a collusive fraud engineered to avoid the constitutional limits on presidential authority. The brief also emphasizes this kind of collusion between a president and a department he oversees undermines the separation of powers, public confidence in the court system, the powers exercised by state attorneys general and the rule of law.
“This is yet another instance of the president abusing his authority over the agencies of which he is in charge to enrich himself and his family, and attempting to circumvent the court to do so,” Raoul said. “I will continue to defend the rule of law and push back on unlawful and blatant corruption at the expense of Illinois taxpayers.”
In January 2026, President Donald J. Trump, his family and his business organization filed suit against the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) asserting claims related to the disclosure of Trump’s tax return information by a government contractor.
The court noted that Trump potentially was on both sides of the lawsuit, since the defendants reported to him, and ordered the parties to brief the question of whether a “controversy” existed. Without a controversy, the Constitution would require the lawsuit to be dismissed.
However, shortly before a briefing on that issue was due, Trump voluntarily dismissed his claims and entered into a supposed settlement agreement with the Department of Justice (DOJ). That agreement granted Trump and his family immunity from investigations, lawsuits and prosecutions related to certain past conduct, including tax audits, and also required the DOJ to establish a $1.7 billion “Anti-Weaponization” fund using taxpayer dollars.
The court is now considering reopening the dismissal under Rule 60, which permits a court to set aside a judgment and reopen a case on the basis that there was fraud or deception perpetrated by parties upon the court. In today’s brief, Raoul and the coalition highlight the experience of state attorneys general in settling claims on behalf of governments and, based on that experience, the self-dealing and corrupt nature of this settlement agreement.
The coalition argues the timing of the dismissal of Trump’s claims and the irregularities of the settlement, including the DOJ’s failure to assert robust defenses it had asserted in similar cases, indicate this case was collusive and an attempted end-run around constitutional limits on executive branch authority.
Raoul and the coalition highlight the settlement resolves meritless claims by giving Trump and his family a windfall — outcomes that do not happen in typical litigation.
Joining Raoul in filing the amicus brief are the attorneys general of Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Hawaii, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, North Carolina, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia and Washington.
More like this:
- Most Popular
- Top Stories
- Most Recent
