A group of 35 former federal judges had pushed Judge Williams later that month to reopen the case, on the grounds that the settlement deal was a fraud against the court—her court— and was egineered to hide the fact that there was no true adversity between Trump and his own federal agencies. Yes, I’m sure most or all of those judges are Democrats and inclined to block anything this President does. However, just because they are out to get him doesn’t mean they are always wrong. Similarly, 23 states (I bet you can guess almost all 23) and a group of former IRS officials made the same demand.
Acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche told Congress that the DOJ, after considerable blowback, dumped the first part of the settlement, which was the creation of a $1.776 billion payout fund for victims of “weaponization and lawfare.” Judge Williams’ order goes after the second portion of the settlement that the DOJ released a day after the fund was announced. That was the head-exploding part where Trump, DonaldTrump Jr. and Eric Trump, their company and its affiliates were given immunity from any IRS investigations that were pending.
“The nature of the suit itself and the conduct of the parties and counsel from its filing make plain that this was an attempt to use the court to provide some legitimacy to an agreement to confer immunity to people and entities affiliated with the President and to earmark billions of dollars from American taxpayers to redress grievances not defined in the law,” Judge Williams said.
That’s a fair description, amazingly. Talk about audacity!
Then she lowered the boom on the submissive attorneys who didn’t tell their clients that what they wanted to do was unethical and to try to find other lawyers to do it. Epstein & Co. are now banned from being admitted pro hac vice in the Southern District of Florida for a full year. Attorney Brito is being referred to Florida’s bar association for disciplinary action, according to the order.
Judge Williams characterized President Trump as acting in “bad faith and for an improper purpose.” She began by recounting “uncontroverted facts” to show beyond all dispute that there was no true adversity between Trump and the agencies he controlled. Especially damning was Trump’s February 2025 executive order stating that he would guide the DOJ’s litigation conduct as it defended itself against his own lawsuit!
“Not surprisingly then, no attorney appeared on defendants’ behalf, challenged plaintiffs’ actions, or justified the United States’ position in any way,” she said. The DOJ’s “unilateral revision and renunciation” of the payout fund was further proof that both sides of the suit “were aligned, and ultimately, undifferentiated.”
Senate Finance Committee Ranking Member Ron Wyden, D-Ore., said the decision “rightly calls Trump’s sweetheart audit immunity deal what it is: an obscene act of corrupt self-dealing that should never have been allowed.” Again, it is difficult to disagree with that or rule it excessively partisan. Wyden also called on Congress to reject Blanche’s nomination for attorney general because of his role in “orchestrating this perversion of justice.” I’ll go further than that. He orchestrated a criminal conspiracy, or at best enabled one.
Blanche should be disbarred.
Ethics Alarms 
I am no fan of Trump, as you know, but I have to … well, not exactly defend, but at least equivocate on his behalf.
The Democrats did the exact same thing under Obama. Under Biden, they did the same thing but instead of enriching their cronies as Trump and Obama did, they simply accrued more power and funding to the EPA without going through appropriations. Trump actually tried to get “sue and settle” stopped by legislation in his first term. Neither Obama nor Biden did that, because they were happy to use it for their own ends.
This has been going on a long time, and the only reason Trump’s arrangement looks more egregious is because of the sketchiness of the beneficiaries.
The judge’s decision is rife with reversible error, and I am convinced it will not survive.
However, I want to see this nonsense stopped by both parties. Perhaps this will have the effect of making the “sue and settle” abuse of power so toxic it will not happen again. I know, I may be naive, but…
Glenn, all: This is an excellent analysis by legal ethicist Brad Wendel: https://bradwendel.substack.com/p/disciplinary-referrals-for-doj-lawyers?utm_source=post-email-title&publication_id=2647671&post_id=207084363&utm_campaign=email-post-title&isFreemail=true&r=8r6kz&triedRedirect=true&utm_medium=email
Ths was a “win” /”win” for Trump, he either got a huge fund or a very simple precent that this type of “settlement” was unlawful. Now get rid of public unions for all government employees as an example of the exact same lack of adversity.
Would you disbar a lawyer for the FBI who forged an e-mail and presented it to a court in order to obtain a warrant?
You have to ask?????
The DC Bar did not.
They set the precedent, not you.
Different question. You didn’t ask what I thought the DC bar would do. I think my assessment of the quality of my bar’s disciplinary system is a matter of record.
I was under the impression that the suit was initiated under the Biden administration which was settled after he won. I can see how that at that point their was no adversarial interest at this time but we have seen that statutes of limitations are not a bar to those wishing to “lock him up”.
A stay until out of office would make sense but to disbar his attorney who initiated the suit when there was an adversarial interest seems to me to be just another way to prevent anyone from representing Trump by using potential disbarment as a tool. It is no different that Guido saying “that’s a nice business you have. I hope nothing bad happens to it”.
What of John Eastman and Rudy Giuliani who have been disbarred in several states for giving legal opinions that ran contrary to the established narrative? Both were targeted and that fund would have provided some form of redress. With that said, why do we need a fund in the first place if you can go to court and win a suit against the government. Hell, many have won large judgements against local governments for rights violations. Do those in power who simply say settle for millions rather than fight the claim that use taxpayer dollars really have an adversarial interest when they make those decisions. I can say the same thing about school boards that vote on teacher pay or other government unions.
I don’t know which emits a greater stench, this settlement or the fact that parts of the government continue to find ways to inflict pain through lawfare on the disfavored while favoring their own.
“I was under the impression that the suit was initiated under the Biden administration which was settled after he won.”
So was I. It wasn’t. The suite was filed in January OF THIS YEAR and almost immediately withdrawn with the “settlement.” One of the many aspects of it that make a colorable excuse impossible to maintain.