Sweetheart deal or perfect crime? trump's irs-doj pact sparks constitutional conundrum

Lawfare's Anna Bower and Eric Columbus have laid bare the constitutional conundrum surrounding the sweetheart deal between the Trump administration and Jeffrey Epstein's estate.

Constitutional obstacles to stopping the atrocity

The duo details the legal hurdles to challenging the arrangement in court, including the disputed question of whether Congress can sue to block it. Most recently, the D.C. Circuit Court held that the House of Representatives could raise an Appropriations Clause challenge to the Trump administration's transfer of funds for the border wall, but the case became moot when Trump lost the election.

While an Appropriations Clause challenge remains possible, the easier remedy would be legislative: Congress could pass a bill to block the fund, a move Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer has signaled he intends to pursue via amendments to the Republicans' reconciliation bill.

However, the Treasury Department must certify any payment from the Judgment Fund, and violating the Antideficiency Act by knowingly and willfully spending non-appropriated funds is a federal crime. While no one has been prosecuted, there's always a first time, and counting on a preemptive Trump pardon may be an unwise bet.

But lawfulness of a payment from the Judgment Fund to the Anti-Weaponization Fund would be a sufficient defense to any such charge, experts argue. In the meantime, the whole scheme may be enough even to turn the stomachs of the supine Republican majorities, with Senate Majority Leader John Thune already having balked.