U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams of the Southern District of Florida is under scrutiny following a misconduct complaint filed by House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan. Jordan, a Republican from Ohio, has formally requested that the Judicial Conference of the United States investigate whether Williams abused her judicial authority in her handling of a lawsuit involving President Donald Trump and the Internal Revenue Service. The complaint argues that Williams violated fundamental tenets of judicial impartiality by imposing sanctions after the plaintiffs had voluntarily dismissed the underlying action.
The dispute stems from a lawsuit filed in early 2026 by Trump, his adult sons Eric and Donald Jr., and the Trump Organization. The plaintiffs sought $10 billion in damages against the IRS following the leak of Trump's tax returns by agency contractor Charles Littlejohn, who was subsequently sentenced to five years in federal prison. Although Trump voluntarily dismissed the case in May, the administration announced a settlement agreement shortly thereafter. This agreement included $1.776 billion for an "anti-weaponization fund" intended for victims of "lawfare" by the Biden administration. While Trump received no direct compensation, he was granted a formal apology and a permanent bar on IRS audits for himself and his family.
In a July order, Williams accused the plaintiffs of manipulating the courts to secure the settlement. She sanctioned two of Trump's attorneys: lawyer Alejandro Brito was referred to the Florida bar for potential disciplinary action, and lawyer Daniel Epstein was barred from practicing under her jurisdiction for at least one year. Jordan characterized the timing of this order as "suspect" because it followed the voluntary dismissal of the case. He further alleged that Williams relied on an amicus brief submitted by Democracy Defenders Action, a group claiming to represent 35 former federal judges. That brief had called for the case to be reopened despite the dismissal and accused both sides of "fraud" regarding the settlement.
Jordan and Rep. Darrell Issa, R-Calif., who co-led the letter as chairman of the panel's subcommittee on courts, stated they could not find Eleventh Circuit authority supporting sanctions in this context. Specifically, they noted a lack of precedent for using inherent powers to punish parties after a voluntary dismissal when driven by arguments from outside parties on issues the court never resolved. They concluded that Williams' conduct risks undermining public confidence in the federal courts and requested that the Judicial Conference review the matter, potentially referring it to the Judicial Council of the Eleventh Circuit. The committee asked for an update on steps taken by November 5, 2026.
Issa described Williams as part of a "Trump Resistance in Robes," claiming she crossed a bright ethical line by targeting Trump's attorneys. This incident reflects a broader clash between Trump allies in Congress and federal judges, with Republicans accusing "activist judges" of blocking their agenda. Conversely, Democrats have supported Williams' skepticism of the settlement. The anti-weaponization fund itself has faced bipartisan pushback and has been blocked by other courts.