In a conspicuous refusal that has intensified scrutiny over the Department of Justice's actions under the previous administration, Charles Littlejohn, a former IRS contractor currently imprisoned, has invoked his Fifth Amendment right, choosing not to testify before the House Judiciary Committee.
According to Breitbart, Littlejohn's decision comes amid an investigation into his seemingly lenient plea deal for leaking sensitive tax data, including that of Donald Trump.
Littlejohn, once tasked with handling confidential information at the IRS, was found guilty of leaking tax records for numerous wealthy Americans, including then-President Donald Trump. This misconduct led to a vast breach of privacy, affecting over 400,000 taxpayers, 89% of whom were business entities, as disclosed by the IRS in January 2024.
In 2023, under the administration of former President Joe Biden, Littlejohn secured a plea agreement with the DOJ. He admitted to one felony count of unauthorized disclosure and was sentenced to five years in prison, the maximum penalty for this single count, despite the scale of his leaks.
The plea deal arranged by the DOJ has been a focal point of contention. Not only did U.S. District Judge Ana Reyes, a Biden appointee, criticize the leniency of the sentence, but so did several Republican members of Congress. They argued the penalty hardly matched the severity and breadth of Littlejohn’s actions.
Reacting to the plea deal, House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith, along with other Republican representatives, expressed dissatisfaction, noting they had hoped for Littlejohn to face a more severe penalty given the extensive nature of his misconduct.
This stirred a broader political and judicial debate, leading to the current investigations by the House Judiciary Committee, chaired by Rep. Jim Jordan. In March 2025, Jordan stepped up the inquiry by formally requesting all DOJ records related to Littlejohn’s case from the Trump-era Justice Department.
Adding complexity to the situation, Littlejohn has commenced an appeal against his sentence while concurrently refusing to testify in congressional hearings—a move that has brought his case back into the spotlight. His public defender, in a letter to the committee, stated, "The testimony that you seek from Mr. Littlejohn directly implicates his Fifth Amendment privilege against self-incrimination. Mr. Littlejohn validly exercises that Constitutional right in declining to testify."
Rep. Jim Jordan highlighted the scale of the breach following Trump's disclosure by the IRS, stating, “After President Trump took office, the IRS disclosed to the Committee that over 405,000 taxpayers were victims of Mr. Littlejohn’s leaks and that ‘89 percent of these taxpayers are business entities." This detail emphasized the enormity of the exposed data.
The incident raised significant privacy concerns and brought into question the decisions made by the DOJ under Biden. As Jordan pointed out, "While it is now clear that Mr. Littlejohn’s conduct violated the privacy of hundreds of thousands of American taxpayers, it remains unclear why the Biden-Harris Justice Department chose to allow him to plead guilty to only a single felony count."
The case has garnered considerable public and media attention, sparking discussions about government transparency, the handling of sensitive taxpayer information, and the accountability of governmental entities in managing breaches of this caliber.
Meanwhile, the legal proceedings and congressional investigations continue to unravel, paving the way for potential legislative and judicial revisions related to such breaches of trust.
As the community watches closely, the outcome of Littlejohn's appeals and the findings from the House Judiciary Committee’s investigations could lead to significant shifts in how similar cases are handled in the future. With the public’s trust at stake, the pressure mounts on all parties involved to ensure justice is thoroughly served and future safeguarding of taxpayer information is guaranteed.
This case is not only a reminder of the vulnerabilities inherent in handling vast amounts of data but also of the critical need for stringent security measures and transparent justice processes to protect the privacy and rights of citizens.