A federal judge in Washington, D.C., has denied a motion by far-left immigrant advocacy groups seeking to block the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) from sharing taxpayer information with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) for the purpose of locating and removing illegal immigrants.
Judge Dabney L. Friedrich, appointed by President Trump, ruled on Monday that the IRS is legally authorized under federal statute to provide taxpayer address information to ICE if it is connected to criminal immigration investigations.
The case, Centro de Trabajadores Unidos et al. v. Scott Bessent et al., was filed by several immigration activist organizations, including “Immigrant Solidarity DuPage” and “Somos Un Pueblo Unido,” who argued that the IRS’s data-sharing plan with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was illegal, arbitrary, and violated immigrants’ trust.
But Judge Friedrich was unswayed, pointing directly to Section 6103(i)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code, which explicitly allows federal agencies to request and receive tax return information—such as names and addresses—for criminal investigations.
The judge emphasized that the IRS is required by law to comply with such requests if proper procedures are followed.
“To summarize, the IRS must disclose limited taxpayer identity information (e.g., the taxpayer’s name and address) to assist another agency in criminal investigations and proceedings, if the agency has satisfied the statutory prerequisites in its written request,” Friedrich wrote in her ruling, reviewed by The Gateway Pundit.
The ruling followed revelations that the IRS and DHS had signed a Memorandum of Understanding on April 7, enabling ICE to formally request the addresses of individuals under criminal investigation—a move that could help locate and deport hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens.
Democrat-aligned nonprofits expressed outrage, alleging that immigrant taxpayers had long been reassured their data would not be used for immigration enforcement.
However, the judge found no basis for that claim, asserting the IRS’s interpretation aligns with longstanding statutory authority.
The plaintiffs also tried to suggest that the IRS data might be used for civil deportation actions—not criminal investigations—but Judge Friedrich swiftly shut that argument down.
The Memorandum explicitly limits disclosures to cases involving “criminal investigations,” and the IRS and DHS testified under oath that any use for civil proceedings would be strictly prohibited.
“At its core, this case presents a narrow legal issue: Does the Memorandum of Understanding between the IRS and DHS violate the Internal Revenue Code? It does not. The plain language of 26 U.S.C. § 6103(i)(2) mandates disclosure under the specific circumstances and preconditions outlined in the Memorandum. For this reason, the plaintiffs have failed to show they are likely to succeed on their claims,” Friedrich wrote.
Read the ruling below:
Read the full article here