... to The Contrarian
Contrarians Strike Two Mighty Blows Against Trump
Two legal victories Friday put wind in our sails: Publisher’s Roundup 69
Contrarians, my democracy litigation colleagues and I just had two of the biggest victories yet in our over 300 legal cases and matters — ones that your paid subscriptions make possible.
Just weeks after I was in court to help argue the case, a federal judge blocked the administration’s attempt to close the Kennedy Center and change its name. The court ordered that Donald Trump’s name be stripped from the building within two weeks, rightly declaring that only Congress has the power to change the name of this national cultural landmark. Hat tip to my colleagues at Democracy Defenders Action and the Washington Litigation Group and, of course, to our wonderful client, Rep. Joyce Beatty (D-OH).
And that was not our only major breakthrough Friday in the fight against Trump’s illegality. As a result of a motion we and our great partners filed for 35 bipartisan former federal judges, a Florida federal court has reopened Trump’s IRS case — the one he used to create that notorious $1.8 billion fund. In a sternly worded order, the judge launched an investigation at our request. In addition to the judges, I thank Platkin LLP and Susman Godfrey for partnering with Democracy Defenders Fund on this case.
And I thank all of the Contrarians who support the work through your paid subscriptions. I don’t think I have ever had two of my cases as the top two stories on both The New York Times and The Washington Post websites, but that happened Friday because these two wins were good news for democracy.
People often ask me if the public is paying attention to what Trump is doing. I think it is, and that is reflected in his historically low polling numbers. These two cases represent scandals that broke through and dominated the media and public attention. The public outrage over Trump’s settlement of his case against his own government and the establishment of his enormous $1.8 billion fund has been vast. It moved beyond the usual swirl of one controversy after another and dominated news coverage, with analysts calling it a “grift fund,” “a pipeline to funnel taxpayer money to President Trump’s allies,” and “in a totally different solar system than any past government settlement on record.”
That’s why we swung into action for those 35 bipartisan former federal judges. They filed in federal court in Florida seeking an investigation of the events of the past two weeks. Our filing, before federal Judge Kathleen Williams, complemented a series of other lawsuits by our partners in the democracy movement addressing different aspects of the controversy.
Though Judge Williams previously accepted Trump’s voluntary dismissal of the case, she noted that no agency “submitted any settlement documents nor filed any documents ensuring that settlement was appropriate where there was an outstanding question as to whether an actual case or controversy existed.”
Those circumstances have now changed — and dramatically so — with the $1.8 billion settlement agreement that occasioned such an explosion of public controversy. As we noted in our motion (your motion), “The purported ‘settlement’ that the parties never placed before this Court raises profound questions about the parties’ candor toward the Court and manipulation of the judicial system, which threatens to undermine confidence in the administration of justice.”
With these kinds of circumstances and the many issues enumerated in the 16-page brief we and the judges filed, the court has the power to reopen the case and look into the matter. That’s just what she did.
Our matter is by no means the only legal action against Trump’s proposed $1.8B fund. In the Eastern District of Virginia, Democracy Forward filed a lawsuit on behalf of a coalition of individuals and organizations also requesting to block the Trump administration’s fund, arguing that it is an unconstitutional and politically discriminatory misuse of taxpayer money. They also had a big win Friday when their judge entered a temporary restraining order forbidding the $1.8 billion fund from operating while the case is briefed and argued in the coming weeks.
In the District Court for the District of Columbia, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW, which I cofounded and where I long served on the board) filed a lawsuit seeking a temporary restraining order to immediately halt this fund on the grounds that the program unlawfully favors political allies and violates constitutional protections. They are also seeking emergency relief.
Meanwhile, in a lawsuit also filed in D.C. federal court, the Public Integrity Project is representing two former police officers who defended the Capitol on January 6, 2021, asserting that the fund is unlawful because it would reward rioters and further endanger the officers’ safety.
Expect more news in all of these cases soon. And we will have another shoe to drop as well, so stand by for that, too!
Meanwhile, in the Kennedy Center case, we are bracing for an appeal of our wins, though we are confident that we can preserve them. But after the court issued its decisions, the president seemed to signal he might throw in the towel. He stated on social media Friday that if he couldn’t have his way with the center, he had instructed the commerce department to “transfer this failing Institution” to Congress — whatever that means.
We are ready for anything that may come next in both of these cases, thanks to you. Your paid subscriptions make our work possible and form the backbone of our litigation efforts in this matter and over 300 others.
Not only that, you also make possible our great coverage of these cases and of so much more. It’s the most unique bargain in American journalism. See for yourself in my usual weekly roundup of the best of the Contrarian.
