President Donald Trump’s controversial settlement with the IRS was an unlawful effort to use the court system for his and his administration’s own benefit, a federal judge ruled Monday, nullifying the agreement while ordering sanctions in the case and referring the president’s attorneys for possible disciplinary action.

Judge Kathleen M. Williams voided Trump’s agreement with the IRS, which included a $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization fund” for the president’s allies and a sweeping immunity agreement shielding him, his sons and other “related parties” from some prosecution or civil action from the federal government.

The IRS settlement was borne out of Trump’s lawsuit against the agency and came as Williams was in the process of determining whether the litigation could even move forward, as it was unclear whether Trump and the IRS he controls as president were actually “adverse” parties with opposing interests.

Williams ruled Monday the parties weren’t actually in opposition to each other and the litigation and settlement aren’t lawful as a result, writing Trump “improperly” used the lawsuit “as a means of conferring legitimacy upon a course of action that they were unwilling to subject to judicial review.”

The judge said the parties in the case are barred from referring to the “settlement agreement” or trying to use its provisions in any official proceedings, essentially voiding it, and ordered both monetary sanctions—paid to former federal judges who asked Williams to reopen the lawsuit—and non-monetary sanctions in the case.

Williams referred Trump’s attorney Alejandro Brito to the Florida Bar for potential disciplinary action, and directed a copy of her order to be included as part of disciplinary proceedings that are already ongoing against Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward.

Trump's personal legal team did not comment directly on the ruling Monday, but criticized the IRS for failing to conceal the president's tax returns and said the president "continues to hold those who wrong America and Americans accountable."

By bringing his IRS lawsuit and settling the case, Trump was using the court “to provide some legitimacy to an agreement to confer immunity to people and entities affiliated with the President and to earmark billions of dollars from American taxpayers to redress grievances not defined in the law,” Williams wrote Monday, concluding the plaintiffs in the case—Trump, his eldest sons and the Trump Organization, “acted in bad faith.”

Trump could still appeal Williams’ order and try to get the agreement approved again. It’s also unclear how much the parties could have to pay in sanctions, but the amount will be based on reimbursing the former judges who intervened in the case for their attorneys fees.

If the Trump administration will still try to pay allies who claim the justice system was “weaponized” against them. After Blanche claimed to Congress the Trump administration would abandon its plans for the anti-weaponization fund, The Atlantic reported the White House was still trying to find a way to get money to the people the fund was meant to benefit, including Jan. 6 rioters. It’s unclear if that could be through establishing a different fund separate from the one in the settlement, or if the Trump administration could create a process for people to bring individual legal claims against the government and reach speedy settlements.

Williams noted in a footnote to her ruling that Trump and the government are still free to make a private agreement to establish an anti-weaponization fund or give Trump immunity, as long as it’s separate from the IRS litigation and isn’t framed as a settlement in that case. The question of whether a new private agreement would be “valid and enforceable” isn’t something she has power to decide at this point, Williams wrote.

Trump sued the IRS for $10 billion in January, alleging the agency had failed to keep his tax returns private after a contractor leaked details of the president’s taxes to the press. The case was settled in May as Williams was deliberating on whether it should be thrown out, and quickly became a matter of widespread controversy. The “anti-weaponization” fund was decried by even Republican lawmakers, leading to the Trump administration saying it had abandoned plans for the fund, and a separate judge also blocked the fund from moving forward. The immunity deal had remained intact prior to Monday’s ruling despite widespread condemnation from Trump critics over the agreement and its sweeping provisions. Trump has denied being involved with the creation of the settlement but has praised it and defended the $1.8 billion fund even after his administration abandoned it, calling it a “great idea.”

Lawsuit Against Trump’s $1.8 Billion Fund Will Keep Moving Forward, Judge Rules (Forbes)

Judge Keeps Blocking Trump’s $1.8 Billion Fund—Until DOJ Can Prove It’s Dead (Forbes)

Are Trump-Linked Companies Benefiting From His IRS Immunity Deal? Democrats Want To Find Out. (Forbes)