2. Legal Articles
  3. Immigration
  4. DOJ Settles With Pro-Israel Group Over IRS Targeting Allegations

REFINE BY AREAS

Search Legal Articles

DOJ Settles With Pro-Israel Group Over IRS Targeting Allegations

by Alexander J. Segal on Dec. 03, 2018

Immigration Immigration  Deportation Immigration  Visa 

Summary: Here, I will post about an interesting conclusion to a non-immigration story. On February 1, 2018, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that it has entered into a settlement agreement with Z Street, a pro-Israel non-profit organization...

immigration attorney nycHere, I will post about an interesting conclusion to a non-immigration story.

On February 1, 2018, the Department of Justice (DOJ) announced that it has entered into a settlement agreement with Z Street, a pro-Israel non-profit organization, over alleged improper targeting by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) [PDF version].

Z Street had applied for tax-exempt status from the IRS. Z Street alleged that the IRS had subjected the tax-exempt status applications of Z Street and other pro-Israel non-profit organizations to heightened scrutiny based on their pro-Israel advocacy. In the settlement agreement, which has been submitted to the United States District Court for the District of Columbia for approval, the IRS apologizes to Z Street for the delayed processing of its application for tax-exempt status. You may read the proposed settlement agreement here: [PDF version].

The Z Street settlement is the last in a series of settlements reached between the DOJ and various non-profit groups over allegations of improper treatment by the IRS of tax-exempt applications on the basis of political viewpoint. The District Court for the District of Columbia recently approved similar settlement agreements in Linchpins of Liberty v. United States and True the Vote v. IRS. On October 26, 2017, Attorney General Jeff Sessions announced the settlement agreements in the Linchpins of Liberty case and in NorCal Tea Party Patriots v. Internal Revenue Service (United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio) [PDF version]. On that occasion, Attorney General Sessions stated: “There is no excuse for this conduct. Hundreds of organizations were affected by these actions, and they deserve an apology from the IRS. We hope that today's settlement makes clear that this abuse of power will not be tolerated.”

The allegations brought by Z Street are troubling, and it is encouraging to see the DOJ finally treat them and similar allegations with the seriousness that they deserve. The First Amendment exists in part to prohibit the federal government from engaging in viewpoint-based discrimination of lawful speech. The IRS's alleged conduct would have been troubling regardless of the views it singled out for extra-legal scrutiny, but it is all the more troubling that the majority of the targeted views in recent years consistently ran contrary to the views held by the administration in office at the time. I hope that the spate of settlement agreements will set the precedent going forward that it is categorically unacceptable for the IRS and other federal agencies to discriminate on the basis of disfavoring lawful speech when adjudicating applications such as those for tax-exempt status, regardless of the speech in question.

Please visit the nyc immigration lawyers website for further information. The Law Offices of Grinberg & Segal, PLLC focuses vast segment of its practice on immigration law. This steadfast dedication has resulted in thousands of immigrants throughout the United States.

Lawyer website: http://myattorneyusa.com

Legal Articles Additional Disclaimer

Lawyer.com is not a law firm and does not offer legal advice. Content posted on Lawyer.com is the sole responsibility of the person from whom such content originated and is not reviewed or commented on by Lawyer.com. The application of law to any set of facts is a highly specialized skill, practiced by lawyers and often dependent on jurisdiction. Content on the site of a legal nature may or may not be accurate for a particular state or jurisdiction and may largely depend on specific circumstances surrounding individual cases, which may or may not be consistent with your circumstances or may no longer be up-to-date to the extent that laws have changed since posting. Legal articles therefore are for review as general research and for use in helping to gauge a lawyer's expertise on a matter. If you are seeking specific legal advice, Lawyer.com recommends that you contact a lawyer to review your specific issues. See Lawyer.com's full Terms of Use for more information.