Major Ruling Changes Immigration Fight

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit ruled that the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) can continue sharing data with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The policy was previously blocked by U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani.

The judge panel declined to issue a preliminary injunction for Centro de Trabajadores Unidos and other nonprofit organizations challenging the data-sharing.

Judge Harry T. Edwards stated that the nonprofit organizations are “unlikely to succeed on the merits of their claim,” Newsweek reports. The information shared by the IRS, such as names and addresses of illegal immigrants, is not protected under the IRS privacy policy.

Attorney General Pam Bondi celebrated the ruling, declaring that the decision is a “crucial victory for President Trump’s agenda to Make America Safe Again. It also reaffirms a simple truth: laws set by Congress must be enforced, not undermined by activist judges.”

Talwani’s February 5 ruling on the subject argued that “there is significant hardship in the potential misidentification of noncitizens and citizens alike that could lead to wrongful arrests, detention and even removal.”

“Because the information sought was not for any specific criminal investigation, the data-sharing will necessarily include both the data of noncitizens subject to criminal prosecution and those who are not subject to criminal prosecution because of their deferred action status,” she wrote.

In May, however, U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich found that the agreement did not violate federal law and denied a motion for a preliminary injunction. “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,” Friedrich wrote in the decision. “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.”

MORE STORIES