Tony West, the brother-in-law of Vice President Kamala Harris, is facing serious allegations of corruption during his time at the Department of Justice (DOJ) and beyond.
West is accused of using his position at the DOJ to funnel billions of dollars in settlements to left-wing groups and law firms that supported his political agenda, with concerns this practice could expand if Harris wins the presidency, as the New York Post reports.
As Hunter Biden's alleged questionable activities within the Biden family continue to make headlines, concerns are mounting that similar controversies could involve West. Married to Kamala Harris’s sister, Maya Harris, West’s actions at the DOJ have sparked a wave of criticism, particularly from those worried about potential corruption in the current administration.
West’s controversial career dates back to his time as head of the DOJ’s Civil Division during the Obama administration. In this role, West allegedly exploited changes in federal policy to distribute large settlements to politically favorable groups, bypassing the checks that previously required Congressional approval for such decisions.
Since 1977, the DOJ has had the authority to approve settlements of any amount using the Judgment Fund, a secretive government reserve. This fund has been criticized for its lack of transparency, as it does not require the disclosure of who receives the funds, the specifics of the cases involved, or even the attorneys who benefit from it.
In 2009, West assumed control of the Civil Division and, according to critics, began using settlement agreements to pay off political allies. One of the most notable examples is a 2010 case involving discrimination claims from Hispanic and female farmers. Despite objections from career lawyers within the DOJ, West pushed through a $1.33 billion settlement.
The New York Times described this settlement as a “runaway train,” driven by racial politics and benefiting certain law firms to the tune of over $130 million in fees. These legal fees, drawn from taxpayer funds, sparked outrage as they appeared to reward political allies rather than serve justice.
The settlement, initially set at $1.33 billion, ballooned to more than $4.4 billion as more plaintiffs were added, including Native American farmers. According to a government statistical expert, the government would have likely won the case had it gone to trial, highlighting the questionable nature of the settlement.
West’s alleged manipulations extended to other high-profile cases, including a 2016 settlement with Volkswagen. In this instance, West inserted a provision requiring the company to fund a $2 billion electric car initiative that had previously been rejected by Congress. This move further fueled suspicions that West was using his position to advance a specific political agenda.
Kamala Harris, during her time as California’s attorney general, co-signed several of these agreements, which directed funds to liberal groups, raising additional concerns about her potential future administration. Critics argue that if Harris wins the presidency, these types of settlements could become even more common.
The Biden-Harris administration has continued some of these controversial practices. For instance, a billion-dollar settlement with illegal immigrants in 2021 was halted after public backlash, but attorney fees were still paid out. This pattern has led many to question the integrity of the DOJ under their leadership.
Most recently, the DOJ paid $2 million to FBI agents Peter Strzok and Lisa Page for the release of their anti-Trump texts, despite having grounds to contest the case in court. This settlement, like others, raises concerns about the misuse of taxpayer money to support politically motivated actions. Emails from West’s deputy further deepen suspicions. One email asked, “Can you explain to Tony the best way to allocate some money toward an organization of our choosing?”
Such communications suggest a deliberate effort to steer funds to favored groups. The ongoing scrutiny of West’s actions, coupled with the broader concerns about the Biden-Harris administration’s handling of settlements, has led to growing public outcry. As these practices come to light, the potential for further controversy looms large, especially with the possibility of Harris’s ascendancy to the presidency.
