Tangent
In addition to the creation of the $1.8 billion fund, Trump’s settlement with the IRS also included a provision giving him and his eldest sons—who were also plaintiffs in the case—widespread legal immunity from prosecution or civil cases based on conduct that took place before the settlement. That includes barring the IRS from auditing any of the president’s existing tax returns. That provision of the settlement was not at issue in this lawsuit, so Brinkema’s ruling does not have any impact on any IRS audits or other investigations into Trump and his family.
Read more Michael Dell Earns $35 Billion From Dell’s Best Day Ever—Passing Zuckerberg As 6th Richest
What To Watch For
Briefing in the lawsuit is moving forward, with Brinkema ordering the government and plaintiffs to file arguments for why there should be a more lasting pause in the case before the June 12 hearing. This case is one of several lawsuits now pending against the $1.8 billion fund, which means there could still be more rulings blocking the fund, even if Brinkema changes her mind in the future and lifts the current pause. It’s possible the issue could ultimately be brought to the Supreme Court to determine, and it remains to be seen how long the litigation could take to play out or if any money could be distributed through the fund in the meantime.
Read more Trump Mocks Jill Biden Saying She Thought Joe Was Having A Stroke In 2024 Debate
Key Background
Trump controversially settled his IRS lawsuit on May 18 as it faced the imminent possibility of being thrown out entirely, reaching an agreement with his administration as the judge overseeing the case was determining whether the president and the IRS were actually opposing parties who could be in litigation against each other. The settlement has drawn widespread opposition from Democrats and ethics experts who have painted the “anti-weaponization” fund as a “slush fund” designed to reward the president’s political supporters, and even many Republicans have expressed concerns about the arrangement. In addition to the lawsuits challenging it, lawmakers in Congress have also introduced legislation designed to thwart it, while politicians in Democratic-led states have floated proposals like levying a 100% tax on any funds received through it. Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, who previously served as Trump’s personal attorney, has defended the fund and claimed the president had no involvement with establishing it.
Further Reading
ForbesBlanche Denies Trump Helped Create $1.8 Billion Fund—But New Report Suggests IRS Lawyers Opposed SettlingBy Alison DurkeeForbesMore Republicans Blast Trump’s $1.8 Billion ‘Anti-Weaponization’ Fund As Blanche Pleas For Their ApprovalBy Sara DornForbesTrump Gets $1.8 Billion Payday With ‘Anti-Weaponization’ Fund As He Drops IRS CaseBy Alison Durkee