Whitehouse demands answers ahead of nomination hearing for Todd Blanche, who greenlighted the purported settlement and whose DOJ is being scrutinized for potentially committing a "fraud on the court" in Florida

Washington, D.C. - U.S. Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D-RI), the Ranking Member of Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Federal Courts, sent a letter yesterday to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, and IRS CEO Frank Bisignano seeking outstanding answers on President Trump and the Department of Justice's attempted creation of a massive taxpayer-funded slush fund to reward the President's political allies and the related tax amnesty and legal immunity agreement for the Trump family and their business associates.

"Although Acting AG Blanche subsequently told a House subcommittee that DOJ would not move forward with the Fund, DOJ lawyers recently refused to submit a sworn declaration providing that assurance to a federal court. Acting AG Blanche also said during the House hearing that the Trump family tax amnesty and legal immunity addendum will remain in effect even if DOJ is not moving forward with the Fund," wrote Whitehouse.

The Senator added, "DOJ may have deliberately disregarded defenses readily available to the IRS in order to orchestrate the purported 'Settlement Agreement,' and potentially-as alleged by thirty-five former federal judges in their motion to reopen the [Trump v. IRS] case-'the parties used the proceedings before [the] Court as a legal pretext,' constituting a fraud on the court. Despite the seriousness of these allegations, DOJ has chosen not to respond to the court's inquiry regarding the matter."

In May, the MAGA Department of Justice announced that President Trump had agreed to drop a $10 billion lawsuit he initiated against his own Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax information in exchange for the creation of an unprecedented $1.776 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund." The commission overseeing the fund would have the authority to dole out the nearly $1.8 billion in taxpayer funds to settle claims brought by anyone who believed they were harmed by the "weaponization" of the justice system, including participants convicted of assaulting law enforcement and other crimes related to the January 6 insurrection.

One day after the settlement agreement was announced, the Department of Justice announced an addendum that would purportedly prohibit the IRS from pursuing audits against Trump, his family, and their business associates for any previous tax offenses, and shield them from any other "lawfare and/or weaponization" as part of a bizarre side deal to the Department's compensation fund agreement.

A federal judge in Florida opened an inquiry into whether DOJ and Trump's personal lawyers committed "fraud on the court," an allegation unprecedented in DOJ history, in Trump v. Internal Revenue Service. Thirty-five former federal judges signed a filing saying that "corruption of the judicial process is exactly what happened here" and describing the purported settlement as an "unprecedentedly fraudulent scheme." The judge called the allegations "grievous" and invited a response, which DOJ subsequently failed to provide.

Senators Whitehouse and Dick Durbin, the Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, wrote a letter to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche in late May requesting that the Department of Justice preserve all records related to the proposed "Anti-Weaponization Fund" and the purported "Settlement Agreement" in Trump v. Internal Revenue Service.

In the most recent letter, Whitehouse requested answers to the following questions by July 14, 2026:

1. Please provide a copy of all memoranda prepared by the IRS discussing defenses against the plaintiffs' claims in Trump v. Internal Revenue Service, No. 1:26-cv-20609 (S.D. Fla.).
2. Please provide a copy of IRS's referral policy regarding referral of cases and legal defense to DOJ.
3. Please provide all correspondence between DOJ and IRS personnel regarding Trump v. Internal Revenue Service, No. 1:26-cv-20609 (S.D. Fla.).
4. Please provide all memoranda prepared in response to the ongoing inquiry regarding whether there was "fraud on the court" in Trump v. Internal Revenue Service, No. 1:26-cv-20609 (S.D. Fla.).
5. Which DOJ personnel negotiated the tax amnesty and legal immunity provisions in the May 19, 2026, addendum? Please name all DOJ personnel involved in these negotiations.

Full text of the letter is below and a PDF is available here.

July 1, 2026

The Honorable Todd Blanche

Acting Attorney General

U.S. Department of Justice

950 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20530

The Honorable Scott Bessent

SecretaryU.S. Department of the Treasury

1500 Pennsylvania Avenue NW

Washington, DC 20220

Frank Bisignano

Chief Executive Officer

Internal Revenue Service

1111 Constitution Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20224

Dear Acting Attorney General Blanche, Secretary Bessent, and IRS Chief Executive Officer Bisignano:

I write to request that the Department of Justice and the Internal Revenue Service provide documents and responses regarding outstanding questions about the proposed $1.776 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund" (the "Fund") and the purported "Settlement Agreement" in Trump v. Internal Revenue Service, No. 1:26-cv-20609 (S.D. Fla.).

On May 18, 2026, DOJ announced the creation of the Fund "to provide a systematic process to hear and redress claims of others who suffered weaponization and lawfare."^[1] Additionally, on May 19, 2026, DOJ released an addendum to the purported "Settlement Agreement" stating that the U.S. government would be "forever barred" from pursuing "examinations" of President Trump, his family, "related or affiliated individuals," and related trusts and businesses, for any matter involving previously filed tax returns or "Lawfare and/or Weaponization."^[2] Although Acting AG Blanche subsequently told a House subcommittee that DOJ would not move forward with the Fund, DOJ lawyers recently refused to submit a sworn declaration providing that assurance to a federal court.^[3] Acting AG Blanche also said during the House hearing that the Trump family tax amnesty and legal immunity addendum will remain in effect even if DOJ is not moving forward with the Fund.^[4]

As the court noted in its May 29, 2026, order in Trump v. Internal Revenue Service,^[5] the Internal Revenue Service reportedly prepared a memorandum outlining ways to challenge President Trump's claims in that case.^[6] The reporting further indicated that the twenty-five-page IRS memorandum advised DOJ to move to dismiss the lawsuit.^[7] The existence of the memorandum indicates that DOJ may have deliberately disregarded defenses readily available to the IRS in order to orchestrate the purported "Settlement Agreement," and potentially-as alleged by thirty-five former federal judges in their motion to reopen the case-"the parties used the proceedings before [the] Court as a legal pretext," constituting a fraud on the court.^[8] Despite the seriousness of these allegations, DOJ has chosen not to respond to the court's inquiry regarding the matter.

Given the grave concerns raised by these facts, I request timely responses to the following questions:

1. Please provide a copy of all memoranda prepared by the IRS discussing defenses against the plaintiffs' claims in Trump v. Internal Revenue Service, No. 1:26-cv-20609 (S.D. Fla.).
2. Please provide a copy of IRS's referral policy regarding referral of cases and legal defense to DOJ.
3. Please provide all correspondence between DOJ and IRS personnel regarding Trump v. Internal Revenue Service, No. 1:26-cv-20609 (S.D. Fla.).
4. Please provide all memoranda prepared in response to the ongoing inquiry regarding whether there was "fraud on the court" in Trump v. Internal Revenue Service, No. 1:26-cv-20609 (S.D. Fla.).
5. Which DOJ personnel negotiated the tax amnesty and legal immunity provisions in the May 19, 2026, addendum? Please name all DOJ personnel involved in these negotiations.

Please provide a response by July 14, 2026. I look forward to your prompt response.

^[1] Dep't of Justice, Press Release, Justice Department Announces Anti-Weaponization Fund (May 18, 2026), https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-anti-weaponization-fund.

^[2] Office of the Attorney General, Addendum (May 19, 2026), https://www.justice.gov/opa/media/1441216/dl.

^[3] Tierney Sneed, DOJ rebuffs judge's request for Blanche to declare in court that anti-weaponization fund is dead, CNN (June 19, 2026), https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/19/politics/doj-anti-weaponization-fund-judge-request.

^[4] Hannah Rabinowitz & Holmes Lybrand, Takeaways from Blanche's House testimony: 'Anti-weaponization' fund is over, ban on Trump tax audits remains, CNN (June 3, 2026), https://www.cnn.com/2026/06/02/politics/blanche-house-testimony-trump-fund-takeaways.

^[5] Order 3 n.3, Trump v. Internal Revenue Service, No. 1:26-cv-20609 (S.D. Fla. May 29, 2026), ECF No. 65.

^[6] Andrew Duehren, The I.R.S. Thought It Could Fight Trump's Lawsuit, but It Struck a Deal Anyway, N.Y. Times(May 19, 2026), https://www.nytimes.com/2026/05/19/admin/irs-trump-lawsuit-deal.html.

^[7] Id.

^[8] Mot. for Relief from J. or Order 7-11, Trump v. Internal Revenue Service, No. 1:26-cv-20609 (S.D. Fla. May 27, 2026), ECF No. 63.