Politics
JUST IN: Federal Judge Hands Trump Major Victory On Immigration
U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich has denied an injunction aimed at blocking the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) from sharing taxpayer information with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The decision clears the way for the IRS to cooperate with ICE under a recent agreement designed to support criminal immigration enforcement actions.
In a 16-page opinion issued Monday, Judge Friedrich rejected arguments made by four left-wing nonprofit groups — including Centro de Trabajadores Unidos and Somos Un Pueblo Unido — that the data-sharing agreement violates federal tax confidentiality laws. The plaintiffs had sought to stop the IRS from sharing Individual Taxpayer Identification Number (ITIN) data with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), claiming it would harm undocumented immigrants who file taxes in good faith.
But Friedrich ruled that the agreement between the IRS and DHS — laid out in an April 7 Memorandum of Understanding — does not violate federal statute, provided that strict legal procedures are followed.
“The Memorandum explicitly authorizes the sharing of certain tax return information for criminal immigration enforcement purposes,” the ruling states, affirming that such sharing is lawful.
Plaintiffs argued that the IRS was circumventing federal privacy laws and improperly changing its longstanding policy without considering the “reliance interests” of immigrants who have complied with tax filing requirements. But the court dismissed these claims, noting that the IRS is required by law to provide taxpayer identity information — including names and addresses — to federal agencies conducting criminal investigations, so long as they submit a valid written request.
“As long as the agency has a name and an address for a taxpayer, it can request address and name information from the IRS to assist the requesting agency in a criminal investigation or proceeding, and the IRS must comply,” the judge wrote.
Judge Friedrich was blunt in her assessment of the plaintiffs’ legal standing. While one group, Somos Un Pueblo Unido, was found to have standing to challenge whether the IRS acted beyond its legal authority, the court concluded that none of the plaintiffs had standing to challenge the agreement on the basis that it might be used for civil deportation enforcement.
“At this stage, the plaintiffs have not established that it is likely that IRS disclosures will be used to ‘facilitate the civil enforcement of immigration laws’ … and thus, they lack standing to raise this claim,” Friedrich stated.
The ruling said that the IRS would still be barred from sharing information solely for civil immigration purposes, unless criminal enforcement was clearly the intent of the request. ICE must demonstrate a criminal investigative basis in each case, and the IRS is required to review every request for compliance with the law.
The Trump administration, now well into its second term, has made immigration enforcement a central pillar of its policy agenda. Monday’s court decision could dramatically expand ICE’s ability to locate and prosecute individuals in the country illegally — especially those who have defied deportation orders.
For now, the Trump administration is free to move forward with its plan to coordinate with the IRS in identifying and locating illegal immigrants involved in criminal investigations.
