In a noteworthy legal development, a federal judge in Washington, D.C., has dismissed a motion from progressive immigrant advocacy groups aimed at preventing the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) from sharing taxpayer information with Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). This data-sharing is intended as part of efforts to identify and deport undocumented immigrants.
Judge Dabney L. Friedrich, appointed during the Trump administration, issued her ruling on Monday, asserting that federal law permits the IRS to disclose taxpayer address information to ICE when it pertains to criminal immigration investigations.
The case, Centro de Trabajadores Unidos et al. v. Scott Bessent et al., was initiated by various immigration advocacy organizations, including “Immigrant Solidarity DuPage” and “Somos Un Pueblo Unido.” These groups contended that the IRS’s collaboration with the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was illegal, arbitrary, and detrimental to the trust of immigrant communities.
However, Judge Friedrich was unyielding, citing Section 6103(i)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code, which explicitly allows federal entities to request and obtain tax return information—such as taxpayers’ names and addresses—in connection with criminal investigations.
She highlighted that the IRS is bound by law to comply with such requests when they adhere to proper procedures. “Essentially, the IRS is mandated to disclose limited taxpayer identity information (e.g., the taxpayer’s name and address) to aid another agency in criminal investigations and proceedings, provided that the agency meets the statutory requirements in its written request,” Friedrich articulated in her opinion, which was reviewed by .
This ruling followed disclosures that the IRS and DHS had formalized a Memorandum of Understanding on April 7, granting ICE the authority to request the addresses of individuals under criminal investigation—an action that could facilitate the targeting and deportation of hundreds of thousands of undocumented immigrants.
Nonprofits associated with the Democratic Party reacted with indignation, asserting that immigrant taxpayers had long been assured their information wouldn’t be utilized for immigration enforcement purposes.
Yet, the judge found no merit to this claim, affirming that the IRS’s interpretation aligns with established statutory authority.
The plaintiffs also attempted to argue that IRS data might be misused for civil deportation actions rather than criminal investigations; however, Judge Friedrich promptly dismissed this notion.
The Memorandum specifically restricts disclosures to matters involving “criminal investigations,” and both the IRS and DHS testified under oath that any use for civil proceedings would be explicitly prohibited.
“At its essence, this case revolves around a narrow legal question: Does the Memorandum of Understanding between the IRS and DHS contravene the Internal Revenue Code? The answer is no. The clear language of 26 U.S.C. § 6103(i)(2) necessitates disclosure under the particular circumstances and conditions stipulated in the Memorandum. Consequently, the plaintiffs have not demonstrated a likelihood of success on their claims,” Friedrich concluded.
For those interested, the ruling can be accessed below:
