2026-07-13T12:49:00-0400 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻（CBS News）
作者：雅各布·罗森
杰克·罗森是负责报道司法部的记者。此前他曾担任竞选数字记者，报道特朗普总统2024年竞选活动，还曾担任《玛格丽特·布伦南与本周》节目的助理制片人。
阅读完整简介
更新时间：2026年7月13日 / 美国东部时间下午3:48 / 哥伦比亚广播公司新闻
华盛顿讯——一名联邦法官周一对代表特朗普总统起诉美国国税局（IRS）的律师施加职业处罚，并严厉批评司法部对该案的处理方式，认定该诉讼是出于“不当目的”提起的。
在一份长达56页的严厉裁决中，美国地区法官凯瑟琳·威廉姆斯将特朗普的一名律师亚历杭德罗·布里托移交佛罗里达州律师协会，以考虑采取纪律处分措施。法官还限制了第二名律师丹尼尔·爱泼斯坦在佛罗里达州南区执业的能力。
威廉姆斯同时禁止司法部、国税局和特朗普在司法、行政、监管或其他程序中，将双方达成的协议条款作为本案和解的证据援引或使用。
威廉姆斯在裁决中写道，该案“是出于不当目的提起的——为一项在法律和事实上都没有可靠依据的‘和解’获取司法合法性的认可”。她还得出结论称，总统及其两名长子——作为与特朗普一同起诉的原告，“存在恶意行为”。
“总而言之，本法院面前的事实表明，双方之间从未存在对抗性；从未存在案件或争议；也从未存在谁会胜诉的疑问，”她说道。
威廉姆斯还指示将其命令副本邮寄给纽约州律师协会和哥伦比亚特区律师协会，代理司法部长托德·布兰奇和副司法部长斯坦利·伍德沃德分别是这两个协会的成员。布兰奇和伍德沃德签署了与特朗普达成的和解相关文件。
特朗普法律团队的一名发言人在回应该裁决时表示：“国税局错误地允许一名 rogue、受政治动机驱使的员工向《纽约时报》、ProPublica和其他左翼新闻媒体泄露有关特朗普总统、其家人以及特朗普集团的私人保密信息，随后该信息被非法泄露给数百万人。特朗普总统将继续追究那些伤害美国和美国人民的人的责任。”
威廉姆斯的这一罕见命令，是针对35名前法官群体对5月份达成的和解协议提出的担忧作出的。该协议结束了总统及其两名长子今年早些时候针对国税局提起的100亿美元民事诉讼，该案起因是一名政府承包商泄露了特朗普的纳税申报单。
该和解协议最初包括设立一个17.76亿美元的“反武器化”基金，旨在向那些声称联邦政府被“武器化”对付他们的个人提供纳税人资助的赔偿。但在国会强烈反对和一名联邦法官作出裁决后，布兰奇表示司法部“不会推进”该项目。
和解协议中的另一项条款仍然有效，该条款永久禁止国税局对特朗普、其长子、其公司或其家族关联公司追讨税款索赔。
这些前法官在5月份要求威廉姆斯重新审理特朗普与其政府之间的案件，辩称双方为解决总统的民事诉讼而达成的协议是“串通勾结的产物”，也是“对法院的欺诈”。就在威廉姆斯权衡自己是否对该案拥有管辖权时，双方达成了和解。
在她的裁决中，威廉姆斯表示，没有可供法院裁决的案件或争议。由于特朗普起诉的是他作为总统可以控制的联邦机构和官员，因此不存在对立诉讼当事人，她认定。威廉姆斯判定特朗普“不当利用这场诉讼来为本案中的特定裁决辩护——获得纳税人资金的使用权以及免受审计和其他调查的豁免——这是通过利用对被告的控制实现的”。
“特朗普总统直到再次入主白宫，并任命他的前律师——以及那些被指为‘反武器化基金’潜在受益人的人的前律师——担任司法部的要职后，才提起他的诉讼请求，”她在裁决中写道。“这些官员随后代表美国与他的现任律师（包括他前白宫法律顾问）进行谈判，达成了一项‘和解’。声称双方之间曾经存在对抗性，这简直是荒谬可笑。”
威廉姆斯严厉斥责司法部对该案的处理方式，指责其“放弃了全力维护美国利益的责任”。威廉姆斯表示，司法部与特朗普达成和解，“无视了司法部的政策，实现了法律未授权以及明确禁止的目标”。
“诉讼本身的性质以及双方和律师从立案开始的行为清楚表明，这是一次试图利用法院为一项协议提供合法性的尝试，该协议旨在豁免与总统有关联的个人和实体，并从美国纳税人那里划拨数十亿美元资金，以弥补法律未定义的不满，”威廉姆斯写道。“总统可能是行政部门事实上的‘诉讼主导者’，但作为民事诉讼的一方，他以及所有参与诉讼的各方和律师，都必须遵守规则。”
这位由巴拉克·奥巴马总统任命的法官，驳斥了特朗普及其律师将该案描述为“普通案件”的说法，称其是“令人震惊的错误陈述”。
“首席原告和被告都是公职人员——行政部门的最高层——他们宣誓要维护法律、忠实履行公职职责，并保护美国公众的利益，”她写道。“本法院面前的问题是，他们是否无视了道德规范、法院规则和法律权威，操纵司法程序。问题在于，他们是否为了用合法性的外衣来美化他们获取前所未有的公共财政资源的努力而这样做。本案绝非‘普通’。”
威廉姆斯还抨击了负责该案的政府律师，称特朗普政府“未能为这场诉讼辩护，也未能回应法院的管辖权查询，因为其立场无法经受司法审查”。
她说，为“反武器化”基金承诺的17.76亿美元“更像是一种‘品牌塑造’努力，而非对损害赔偿进行的深思熟虑的计算”。
法官的命令发布之际，距离布兰奇出席参议院司法委员会确认担任司法部长的听证会仅剩数日。预计他将面临有关设立“反武器化”基金以及有效豁免特朗普的尖锐提问。总统上个月正式提名曾担任特朗普私人刑事辩护律师的布兰奇领导司法部。
Judge rebukes Trump and DOJ over IRS lawsuit, refers lawyer for disciplinary proceedings
2026-07-13T12:49:00-0400 / CBS News
By Jacob Rosen
Jake Rosen is a reporter covering the Department of Justice. He was previously a campaign digital reporter covering President Trump’s 2024 campaign and also served as an associate producer for “Face the Nation with Margaret Brennan.”
Read Full Bio
Updated on: July 13, 2026 / 3:48 PM EDT / CBS News
Washington — A federal judge on Monday imposed professional penalties against lawyers representing President Trump in a civil lawsuit he brought against the IRS and harshly criticized the Justice Department for its handling of the case, concluding that the suit was brought for an “improper purpose.”
In a scathing 56-page decision, U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams referred one of Mr. Trump’s lawyers, Alejandro Brito, to the Florida Bar for potential disciplinary action. The judge limited the ability of a second lawyer, Daniel Epstein, to practice in the Southern District of Florida.
Williams also barred the Justice Department, IRS and Mr. Trump from citing or using provisions of a deal the two sides reached in judicial, administrative, regulatory or other proceedings as evidence of a settlement in the case.
The case, Williams wrote, “was brought for an improper purpose — to gain the imprimatur of judicial legitimacy for a ‘settlement’ that had no viable basis in law or fact.” Additionally, the president and his two older sons, who were plaintiffs alongside Mr. Trump, “acted in bad faith,” she concluded.
“In sum, the facts before this Court demonstrate there was never adverseness between the Parties; there was never a case or controversy; and there was never a question as to who would prevail,” she said.
Williams also directed a copy of her order to be mailed to the State Bar of New York and to the District of Columbia Bar, of which acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward are members, respectively. Blanche and Woodward signed documents relating to the settlement with Mr. Trump.
A spokesman for Mr. Trump’s legal team said in response to the decision, “The IRS wrongly allowed a rogue, politically-motivated employee to leak private and confidential information about President Trump, his family, and the Trump Organization to the New York Times, ProPublica and other left-wing news outlets, which was then illegally released to millions of people. President Trump continues to hold those who wrong America and Americans accountable.”
Williams’ extraordinary order came in response to concerns raised by a group of 35 former judges about the settlement agreement reached in May. The deal brought to an end the $10 billion civil lawsuit the president and his two oldest sons filed against the IRS earlier this year over the leak of Mr. Trump’s tax returns by a government contractor.
The settlement initially included the creation of a $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization” fund that aimed to provide taxpayer-funded payouts to individuals who alleged the federal government had been “weaponized” against them. But after immense blowback from Congress and a federal judge’s ruling, Blanche said the Justice Department was “not moving forward” with the program.
Another provision of the settlement that permanently bars the IRS from pursuing tax claims against Mr. Trump, his oldest sons, his company or affiliated companies of his family remains intact.
The former judges asked Williams in May to reopen the case between Mr. Trump and his administration, arguing that the agreement they reached to resolve the president’s civil lawsuit was “the product of collusion” and a “fraud on the court.” The settlement was reached as Williams was weighing whether she even had jurisdiction over the case.
In her order, Williams said that there was no case or controversy for the court to decide. Since it was filed by Mr. Trump against a federal agency and officials that he, as president, had control over, there would be no adverse litigant, she found. Williams determined that Mr. Trump “improperly employed this lawsuit to justify a particular award in this matter — access to taxpayer funds and exemption from audits and other investigations — which was accomplished by leveraging control over Defendants.”
“President Trump did not pursue his claims until he once again occupied the White House and had appointed his former lawyer, and the former lawyer of persons who are putative beneficiaries of the ‘Anti-Weaponization Fund’ to prominent positions in the DOJ,” she wrote in her order. “These officials then negotiated on behalf of the United States, with his current lawyers, including his former White House Counsel to reach a ‘settlement.’ It is risible to suggest that there was ever adverseness between the Parties.”
Williams excoriated the Justice Department for its handling of the case and accused it of “abdicating its responsibility to zealously defend the interests of the United States.” By entering into the settlement with Mr. Trump, Williams said the administration “disregarded DOJ policies, and accomplished objectives beyond those authorized, as well as those specifically prohibited, by law.”
“The nature of the suit itself and the conduct of the Parties and counsel from its filing make plain that this was an attempt to use the Court to provide some legitimacy to an agreement to confer immunity to people and entities affiliated with the President and to earmark billions of dollars from American taxpayers to redress grievances not defined in the law,” Williams wrote. “The President may be the functional ‘dominus litus’ of the Executive Branch, but as a party to a civil suit, he, as well as all the parties and lawyers before a court, are bound by the rules.”
The judge, who was appointed by President Barack Obama, rejected characterizations of the case as “ordinary” by Mr. Trump and his lawyers, calling it a “startling misstatement.”
“Lead Plaintiff and Defendants are public servants — the pinnacle of the Executive Branch — sworn to uphold the law, faithfully perform the duties of their office, and protect the interests of the American public,” she wrote. “The issue before the Court is whether, instead, they ignored ethical norms, court rules, and legal authority to manipulate the judicial process. The issue is whether they did so to gild their efforts to gain unprecedented access to the public fisc with the patina of legitimacy. There is nothing ‘ordinary’ about this case.”
Williams also took aim at the government lawyers working the case, saying the Trump administration “failed to defend this lawsuit or to respond to the Court’s jurisdictional inquiry because its position would not withstand judicial scrutiny.”
She said the $1.776 billion pledged for the “anti-weaponization” fund “speaks of a ‘branding’ effort rather than a deliberate and thoughtful calculation of damages.”
The judge’s order comes days before Blanche is set to appear before the Senate Judiciary Committee for his confirmation hearing for attorney general. He is expected to face sharp questions regarding the creation of the “anti-weaponization” fund and the effective grant of immunity to Mr. Trump. The president formally nominated Blanche, who served as Mr. Trump’s private criminal defense attorney, to lead the Justice Department last month.
发表回复