Judge Denies Request to Prevent IRS From Sharing Tax Data of Illegal Immigrants With DHS

The judge said the plaintiffs lacked standing and hadn’t done enough to show a risk of imminent harm.

The E. Barrett Prettyman U.S. Court House in Washington on Feb. 19, 2025. Madalina Vasiliu/The Epoch Times

WASHINGTON—A federal judge denied two groups’ request for a temporary restraining order that would have prevented the IRS from sharing illegal immigrants’ tax data with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

U.S. District Judge Dabney Friedrich said during a March 19 hearing that the plaintiffs—Centro de Trabajadores Unidos and Immigrant Solidarity DuPage—had failed to show a risk of imminent harm after the government told her that the IRS would abide by federal law governing data sharing for immigration enforcement purposes.

In a lawsuit filed on March 7, the groups said that the Treasury Department, which houses the IRS, couldn’t share tax information for the purposes of immigration enforcement with DHS.

They pointed to Internal Revenue Service Code 6103, which generally prohibits IRS employees from disclosing tax information. However, it contains some exceptions, and during the March 19 hearing, Friedrich asked Department of Justice (DOJ) attorney Andrew J. Weisberg if the government would comply with the law by only getting information under the law’s exceptions.

Weisberg confirmed the administration would follow the law. The DOJ has also filed a motion to dismiss, arguing in part that the plaintiffs lacked standing and that they wrongly sought to sue under the Administrative Procedure Act because another legal remedy was available. More specifically, Congress has allowed taxpayers to seek monetary damages if their tax return information is unlawfully disclosed.

Friedrich did not rule on the motion to dismiss and said she would give the plaintiffs an opportunity to respond. In an oral order, Friedrich said she presumed that the IRS would follow section 6103 if and when it made disclosures.

The DOJ also sought for the plaintiffs to post a bond to cover the costs sustained if a temporary restraining order was issued and the government was found to be wrongfully restricted under that order.

In a memorandum this month, Trump directed federal agencies to seek deposits on injunctions against the administration, stating that “activist organizations fueled by hundreds of millions of dollars in donations and sometimes even government grants have obtained sweeping injunctions far beyond the scope of relief contemplated by the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.”