IRS workers group joins Jan. 6 'slush fund' suit, seeking to block Trump audit carve-out

Trump's Tax Audit Carve-Out: A Constitutional Concern

The recent settlement between President Donald Trump and the IRS has sparked controversy over a provision that would grant the president and his family immunity from certain tax audits. This move has been met with criticism from various quarters, including the National Treasury Employees Union, which represents career IRS auditors. The union has joined the lawsuit challenging the settlement, arguing that it is unlawful and unconstitutional.

The lawsuit claims that the settlement is an unprecedented attempt by the president and his cabinet to manipulate the legal process and laws intended to prevent political interference. The order would provide the president and his relatives and affiliates with a lucrative benefit not available to any other Americans, according to the lawsuit. This move has been seen as a brazen attempt by the Trump administration to shield the president and his family from scrutiny.

The controversy surrounding the settlement has also raised questions about the role of the Justice Department in the matter. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche agreed to the settlement, which has been criticized for its potential implications for government accountability and the rule of law. The lawsuit describes the settlement as 'an unlawful, and breathtakingly corrupt attempt by the President and members of his cabinet to manipulate the legal process and laws intended to prevent political interference to achieve benefits that President Trump and his political allies could not have obtained lawfully.'

The National Treasury Employees Union has joined the lawsuit, arguing that the settlement is a threat to the integrity of the tax system and the principle of equal treatment under the law. The union's president, Skye Perryman, stated that they were 'honored to represent brave IRS employees in this first of its kind case challenging the unlawful scheme, while we continue to pursue the challenge to the $1.776 billion slush fund that will line the pockets of violent criminals, including those who perpetrated the attacks on the Capitol and our elections on January 6.'

The controversy surrounding the settlement has also highlighted the ongoing debate over the role of the Justice Department in the Trump administration. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche's nomination to take over the top Justice Department role is now pending before the full Senate, after it was voted out of the Judiciary Committee this week. The Justice Department could still pay out Jan. 6 rioters even without the fund, although this week, the department told a federal judge in Florida to toss a lawsuit filed on behalf of a number of Jan. 6 participants, saying their claims were barred by the statute of limitations.