Justice Dept. Struggles to Respond to Trump's Suit Against I.R.S.

[BumRushDaShow]

Source: New York Times

March 31, 2026 Updated 8:31 p.m. ET


The Justice Department is struggling to decide how to respond to President Trump’s lawsuit demanding at least $10 billion from the I.R.S., as the department’s lawyers try to resolve by a mid-April deadline the profound ethical questions the case raises, according to two people familiar with the dynamic.

In late January, Mr. Trump took the extraordinary step of suing a federal agency that he oversees, accusing the I.R.S. of not doing enough to prevent the leak of his tax returns to The New York Times in 2020. The suit immediately elicited questions about whether and how Trump administration officials would defend against a lawsuit filed by the head of the executive branch. The government has not yet responded to the case.

Inside the Justice Department and the White House, senior officials are in the middle of a messy and complicated debate over their next steps, according to the people familiar with the deliberations, who spoke on the condition of anonymity to describe internal discussions. While former Justice Department officials see clear flaws in the president’s case, some Trump administration officials worry that assigning a lawyer to contest it would pose an unworkable conflict, given that such a person ultimately works for the president, according to the two people.

Defending the case could also contradict a White House executive order that binds all government lawyers to the president’s interpretation of the law. Another option under consideration is to try to delay the case, either by requesting more time to respond to the suit or by asking the judge to put it on hold until after Mr. Trump leaves office in 2029. Mr. Trump’s lawyers served the government with the suit on Feb. 18, giving the Justice Department 60 days to respond.

Read more: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/31/us/politics/trump-irs-lawsuit-doj.html

---

No paywall (gift)

[wcmagumba]

1. Trump is a God...or so he thinks...he's more like a drooling low level demon...

[Lovie777]

2. Evangelist Christians claim their gawd sent shithole.................

what a cruel gawd.

[Diraven]

3. Trump will order Bondi to order the settlement

Probably for $20 billion.

[SunSeeker]

4. This is an attempted theft of billions of dollars in taxpayer funds.

Last edited Wed Apr 1, 2026, 11:22 AM - Edit history (1)

Trump should go to jail for this alone.

His DOJ is too conflicted to defend the IRS. The defense should be assigned to an independent outside counsel.

[groundloop]

5. They'll settle out of court and tRump will walk away with Billions.

His grift is unprecedented.

[SunSeeker]

6. DOJ should not handle the defense of the IRS in this case in any way, let alone settle the case.

Any AUSA involved should be disbarred. It must go to independent outside counsel or it is a violation of attorney ethics.

[Marcuse]

7. Discovery and counterclaims would make for interesting reading if the Epstein Administration was not totally corrupt.

Bondi may appoint a “independent” counsel. When Trump’s lawyers appear for the defense the court should dismiss the action due to conflict of interest.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

8. MaddowBlog-Judge questions whether Trump can sue his own administration for $10 billion

If the president was waiting for a payout from his IRS lawsuit, a federal judge suggested he might need to start lowering his expectations.

Judge questions whether Trump can sue his own administration for billion

www.ms.now/rachel-maddo...

— Mike Walker (@newnarrative.bsky.social) 2026-04-27T19:11:24.754Z

https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/judge-questions-whether-trump-can-sue-his-own-administration-for-10-billion

In response to highly dubious civil lawsuits, the Trump Justice Department has been exceedingly generous lately, agreeing to lucrative settlements with plaintiffs who are politically aligned with the White House. Whether Donald Trump will be among the beneficiaries, however, remains an open question.

A federal judge suggested late last week that the president might have to lower his expectations. Politico reported:

President Donald Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS over the leaking of his tax returns ran into turbulence Friday as a judge ordered a hearing on whether the Constitution allows the president to sue the federal government he oversees.

U.S. District Court Judge Kathleen Williams has asked Trump’s private attorneys and Justice Department lawyers representing the IRS to address whether his control over the government’s actions in the case means it’s the kind of dispute federal courts cannot consider.

“Although President Trump avers that he is bringing this lawsuit in his personal capacity, he is the sitting president and his named adversaries are entities whose decisions are subject to his direction,” Williams wrote in a four-page order.

“It is unclear to this Court whether the Parties are sufficiently adverse to each other so as to satisfy Article III’s case or controversy requirement,” the judge added, referring to the Constitution.....

Shortly after his lawyers filed the case, the president told reporters that he assumed “nobody would care” if he received a lucrative payout as part of the frivolous litigation. That payout now appears in doubt. Watch this space.

We spent maybe part of one Constitutional law class on the case or controversy provision of the Constitution. This usually came up in the cases dealing with advisory opinions. Here is the relevant part of the UN Constitution

Article III, Section 2, Clause 1:

The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;—to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;—to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction; to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;—to Controversies between two or more States; between a State and Citizens of another State, between Citizens of different States,—between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

Since trump is on both sides of this silly lawsuit, there is no Case or Controversy.