IRS Whistleblowers Sue Hunter Biden’s Attorney for Defamation Amid Legal Controversy

Amid a growing legal battle, IRS whistleblowers Gary Shapley and Joe Ziegler have filed a defamation lawsuit against Hunter Biden’s attorney, Abbe Lowell, claiming that his public statements have defamed them and damaged their careers. As the courtroom drama unfolds, many are left wondering what implications this case will have for whistleblower protections nationwide.

Whistleblower Lawsuit Details

IRS investigators Gary Shapley and Joe Ziegler have filed a $20 million defamation suit against Abbe Lowell in Washington, D.C. The lawsuit claims Lowell retaliated against the whistleblowers with defamatory statements to the media, alleging illegal leaks of Hunter Biden’s tax information. Shapley and Ziegler assert these statements have severely harmed their reputations. In their legal filing, they emphasize integrity when exposing conflicts of interest in Hunter Biden’s investigation.

The whistleblowers affirm that Lowell falsely accused them of leaking grand jury materials and taxpayer information, which they deny. After the duo publicly raised concerns, a plea deal between Hunter Biden and Delaware US attorney David Weiss collapsed. Hunter Biden later pleaded guilty to all felony tax crimes, which the investigators view as validating their initial concerns.

Accusations of Malice and Retaliation

The lawsuit accuses Lowell of malice by falsely accusing the agents of violating grand jury secrecy and taxpayer confidentiality. Legal complaints point to Lowell’s prominent stature, suggesting his accusations exacerbated the damage to the agents’ reputations. By allegedly leaking false allegations to the press, Lowell has caused both professional and personal harm to Shapley and Ziegler. The whistleblowers are now seeking a jury trial in Washington, D.C., to defend their reputations.

The agents refute having publicly disclosed information that is not already available in the public domain. They emphasize that their actions were intended to uphold transparency, suggesting that Lowell’s statements were published with the intent to harm. Shapley and Ziegler’s legal representation alleges that allowing such defamation to go unchallenged could deter future whistleblowers from exposing misconduct.

The Larger Implications

The lawsuit highlights broader concerns about balancing legal expression and reputational harm. Lowell, who is considered a high-profile attorney, argues that his statements were expressions of his view in response to unprecedented public disclosures. Meanwhile, Shapley and Ziegler’s legal team say that unchecked defamation endangers whistleblower protections and public accountability.

As the case progresses, it will impact the immediate parties and influence the procedural precedents for adjudicating whistleblower claims and defamation. With President Joe Biden’s pardon of Hunter Biden, questions of political influence in prosecutorial decisions add further complexity to the unfolding legal proceedings.

 

Sources: