By
May 27, 2026 / 7:57 PM EDT
/ CBS News
Add CBS News on Google
A group of 35 former federal judges asked a court Wednesday to reopen a legal dispute between President Trump and the federal government that was settled by creating a controversial $1.776 billion "anti-weaponization fund," calling the deal potentially fraudulent.The legal filing adds to growing criticism of the settlement deal, which the Justice Department announced last week to resolve a lawsuit from the president accusing the Internal Revenue Service of allowing his tax returns to leak. At the center of the deal is a multibillion-dollar fund that would pay people who allege they were victimized by government "weaponization," and a promise that the IRS will not pursue claims against the president based on prior tax returns.The judge who oversaw the lawsuit — U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams — had signaled last month she planned to look into whether a lawsuit between Mr. Trump and his own administration would be legally valid. She said she needed to assess whether the issue was truly a "case or controversy" between two adversaries, as required by the Constitution. Before fully looking into that issue, Williams granted a request from lawyers for the president and the government to dismiss the case. The settlement deal was announced on the same day.Now, dozens of retired judges are arguing Williams should set aside her dismissal. The group includes former appellate Judge J. Michael Luttig, a well-known conservative jurist who has been critical of Mr. Trump, and former U.S. District Judges Nancy Gertner and Shira Scheindlin.Reopening the case, the judges wrote, would "allow the court to commence an inquiry into whether the Court was deceived, including with respect to the existence of an underlying case or controversy and any purported arms-length negotiations undertaken to resolve."The retired judges wrote that the settlement deal is "a product of collusion and is itself a fraud on the Court." They also noted that Williams' order closing the case said "there is no settlement of record" — which the former jurists argued means Williams was "deceived."
