Trump v. Trump

What happens when a president sues himself?

Trump v. Trump

David Cole

Call it “the art of the self-deal.” You sue yourself, announce a hasty “settlement” when the judge questions whether you are engaged in collusion (with yourself), and direct the creation of a fund consisting of nearly $1.8 billion to be doled out to your allies by a hand-selected commission—all without judicial or congressional approval. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, announcing the creation of President Trump’s “Anti-Weaponization Fund” on Monday, billed it as a way to redress “victims of lawfare and weaponization,” presumably at the hands of the Biden administration—even as Trump pushes the Justice Department to prosecute his personal enemies, such as James Comey and Jerome Powell, on bogus criminal charges. Senator Elizabeth Warren was more accurate, calling the pool of money a political “slush fund” for Trump’s friends. Evidently it wasn’t enough to pardon all those who stormed the US Capitol and brutally assaulted law enforcement officers on January 6, 2021. Now Trump is fixing to use our taxpayer dollars to pay them, too.

As if that wasn’t enough, on Tuesday Blanche quietly released another statement adding that, by the way, the Internal Revenue Service had also agreed to provide Trump, his businesses, and his family members complete immunity from investigation, prosecution, or any liability for any claims involving his or their tax returns that are now pending “or that could be pending.” This is nothing less than a thinly disguised advance pardon for any and all tax liabilities the Trump family and his businesses may have incurred at any time. Indeed this relief is even more expansive than a pardon, because it extends to civil liabilities, not subject to the pardon power. And it extends beyond the Trump administration, purporting to “forever” bar even future administrations from holding him and his family accountable for tax violations. In 2024 The New York Times reported that an audit of Trump’s returns could ultimately cost Trump $100 million in back taxes and penalties. That’s now off the table. Most remarkably, that’s relief Trump could never have obtained in the lawsuit whose putative “settlement” led to this personal bonanza.

Trump filed that suit against the IRS this past January, seeking at least $10 billion in damages on the grounds that the agency was responsible for a private contractor’s leaking tax returns filed by Trump, his corporation, and two of his sons. He claimed to be suing in his “personal” capacity, as a private individual. But he was suing the IRS, a federal agency whose head officer he appoints and can replace at will. How the federal government responds to any lawsuit, including this one, is ultimately Trump’s call, as head of the executive branch. The formal title of the suit is Donald J. Trump v. Internal Revenue Service, but it would be more accurately captioned Trump v. Trump.

Trump’s apparent belief that there’s nothing wrong with suing himself in this way is particularly galling in light of the “unitary executive” theory that his administration has propounded. In litigation currently before the Supreme Court involving his firing of a commissioner of the Federal Trade Commission, Trump argues that the Constitution vests all executive power in the president, which means that he must have complete, unchecked authority to remove all executive officers at will to ensure that their decisions are his decisions. The Court’s conservative majority is likely to agree. But that only underscores the blatant legal and ethical impropriety of Trump, the civilian, demanding a $10 billion judgment from Trump, the president—and then effectively “settling” with himself in exchange for immunity from any personal tax liability and a nearly $1.8 billion fund poised to pay his allies.

Read the full article on the Review’s website here.

---