Trump’s $1.776 billion IRS settlement sparks debate as critics question legality of the compensation fund

The Economic Times
Critics question the legality of a $1.776 billion settlement fund for Trump, arguing it is a slush fund and violates the Appropriations Clause.

Summary

President Donald Trump's $1.776 billion settlement with the IRS, which includes a fund for victims of alleged political "weaponization" and a provision barring future audits, has sparked intense debate. Critics, including Congressional Democrats and watchdog groups, have derided the Anti-Weaponization Fund as a slush fund to steer taxpayer dollars to Trump's allies and have called the tax immunity agreement illegal. Two police officers who defended the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, have already sued, alleging the fund will reward and empower rioters who have harassed them. Legal experts say opponents face high hurdles in challenging the fund, particularly because Trump dismissed his $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS before the settlement was announced, effectively removing the venue for judicial review. The Justice Department announced the fund on Monday, shortly after Trump voluntarily withdrew his lawsuit accusing the IRS of wrongdoing in media leaks of his tax returns. The fund, controlled by Trump allies and financed from the Judgment Fund, will compensate people who claim to have been damaged by U.S. government "weaponization or lawfare." While the Justice Department cited a precedent for similar funds, opponents argue the settlement violates the U.S. Constitution's Appropriations Clause because Congress did not authorize it. Legal experts also question whether the fund violates a U.S. law governing the Judgment Fund if payments are made to people with no pending or imminent claims against the federal government.

(Source:The Economic Times)

Decrypt

Sony Argues in Court That Digital Games Can't Be Owned

The Kingston Whig-Standard

SMK Law: Ontario Court Grants Leave and Certifies Galaxy Digital Securities Class Action

scanx.trade

Indegene gets US court preliminary approval for USD 4.72 million class action settlement

TNW

Google will pay £260m to settle a UK class action over Play Store fees

Australian Financial Review

McDonald’s class action: Justice Michael Lee orders AI use to cut legal costs in $100 million underpayment case

PerthNow

Thousands of Aussies to share in $249 million settlement after superannuation class action

PerthNow

Commonwealth Bank, Colonial First State and Avanteos settle $249m class action

Google News

Awful: The Aviation Herald Founder Forced To Sell Home After Slovakian Airline Lawsuit

New Telegraph

T+1 Settlement cycle On Smooth Course , Boosting Nigeria’s Market Competitiveness – SEC

Yahoo! News

What Meta’s Settlement Means for Teens and Social Media

Infostride

CSCS transitions to T+2 settlement cycle

Headtopics

Lenovo and InterDigital Reach Patent Settlement After German Sales Ban

Et Now

Subhash Chandra's 99.97% haircut explained: What it means in the Rs 6.5-crore settlement

Ellwood City Ledger

Why Pa.'s $516M from Meta suit is less valuable than 2 hours a day

Mint

Setback for Anthropic? Sony, Warner Chappell file lawsuit against AI firm, accusing it of intellectual property theft