{
  "version": "3.33",
  "compiled": "2026-10-09",
  "site": "https://stateofwatch.com",
  "claim": {
    "id": "dc-court-allows-sharing",
    "section": 2,
    "title": "D.C. Circuit says federal tax law permits IRS-to-ICE address sharing",
    "date": "Feb 24, 2026",
    "sort": "2026-02-24",
    "status": "verified",
    "checked": null,
    "note": "D.C. Circuit opinion read directly Oct. 3, 2026. Revived from the cut list with its date, holding and limits corrected.",
    "category": "court",
    "summary": "A federal appeals court refused to temporarily stop the IRS from sharing taxpayer addresses with ICE. It said federal tax law permits the sharing only when ICE makes a written request containing specific information for a non-tax federal criminal investigation. The court did not decide whether the agencies had followed those rules in practice.",
    "body": "Four organizations serving immigrant communities asked for a preliminary injunction, a temporary court order that would stop the address sharing while their lawsuit continued. The D.C. Circuit affirmed Judge Dabney Friedrich's May 12, 2025 refusal to issue that order. It held that 26 U.S.C. § 6103(i)(2) permits IRS to disclose a taxpayer's mailing address for a non-tax federal criminal investigation without a court order, but not on an informal or open-ended request.\n\nThe request must be written and come from the head of a federal agency, an inspector general or certain Justice Department officials. It must give the taxpayer's name and an address already known to belong to that person, the relevant tax periods, the criminal law being investigated and the specific reason the information may matter. The information may go only to government officers directly working on that investigation or related proceedings. The court said these requirements do not permit \"freewheeling disclosure of sensitive information.\"\n\nThe ruling approved the agreement on its face, not everything IRS and ICE had done under it. The panel said it was not deciding \"the legality of any actions taken by IRS or DHS after they finalized the MOU.\" It noted the IRS had admitted disclosing information in response to some requests that did not contain valid addresses, but said those compliance questions were not before it in this case.",
    "quotes": [],
    "sources": [
      {
        "label": "Centro de Trabajadores Unidos v. Bessent, No. 25-5181 (D.C. Cir. Feb. 24, 2026)",
        "primary": true,
        "docket": "25-5181",
        "url": "https://media.cadc.uscourts.gov/opinions/docs/2026/02/25-5181-2160705.pdf",
        "doc": "centro-dccir-opinion"
      }
    ],
    "places": [
      "washington-dc"
    ],
    "related": [
      "irs-42695-disclosures"
    ],
    "url": "https://stateofwatch.com/claims/dc-court-allows-sharing"
  }
}