Donald Trump is challenging attempts by former judges and public-interest groups to recover legal expenses stemming from his abandoned lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service, telling a federal court in Florida that the groups have no legal basis to seek compensation.
The dispute traces back to Trump’s now-withdrawn $10 billion lawsuit, which accused the IRS of failing to prevent the disclosure of his tax records. Although the case was voluntarily dismissed, the legal battle has continued in a different form, centering on whether outside organizations that opposed the suit can recover their costs.
In a filing submitted to a federal court in Miami on Monday, Trump’s legal team objected to requests for roughly $39,000 sought by former government officials and advocacy organizations, as well as an additional claim of about $4,600 in expenses and nominal fees filed by a group of 35 retired federal judges.
The latest clash follows a ruling by U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams, who last month concluded that the lawsuit had been used improperly for personal gain and imposed sanctions. The judge also opened the door for the outside groups, which had participated in the proceedings as amici, to seek reimbursement of their legal costs.
Trump has already appealed that decision.
Attorneys representing the president argued that longstanding Supreme Court precedent and other federal rulings make clear that non-parties to litigation generally cannot collect attorney fees or court costs. According to Trump’s lawyers, the groups involved in the case fall squarely within that category.
The retired judges, however, contend that the court possesses broad authority to impose financial penalties when it finds misconduct in litigation. In their filing, they said their request is intended to protect the integrity of the judicial system and reinforce accountability in federal courts.
Among those seeking reimbursement are former government officials represented by advocacy organizations, including former Justice Department attorneys who maintain that the sanctions order justifies the recovery of their expenses.
What began as a high-profile dispute over leaked tax records has now evolved into a separate courtroom fight over sanctions, legal costs and the limits of judicial authority—issues that could continue to play out even after the original lawsuit itself has disappeared.
