Notice to The Florida Bar: Anti-Weaponization Fund Federal Lawsuit

Notice to The Florida Bar: Anti-Weaponization Fund Federal Lawsuit

Mr. Joshua E. Doyle, Executive Director, The Florida Bar 
Cc: Mr. Richard Courtemanche, Deputy General Counsel, The Florida Bar 
Cc: Mr. Alejandro Brito, Bar # 98442

Dear Mr. Doyle:

It has come to my attention that Judge Kathleen William may have referred Florida attorney Alejandro Brito, Bar # 98442, to the Florida Bar for consideration on whether Brito should be disciplined in light of the findings in the new order in Trump v IRS, according to a post by David Oscar Markus on his SDFLA blog

In defense of Mr. Brito, and to offer myself as a substitute plaintiff-intervenor, I submit my response to the Federal Election Commission of June 25, 2025, which PDF is attached, and found on the FEC website, and my blog Neil 2028. Please note I have a claim against the IRS, and a claim against the State of Florida, the DeSantis administration, and the Biden administration, for lawfare involving Fla. Stat. sec. 934.03.  

NEIL J. GILLESPIE FOR PRESIDENT

WRITTEN OBJECTION to the Federal Election Commission, Administrative Termination of NEIL J. GILLESPIE FOR PRESIDENT Campaign Committee

See this part: 

"I plan to intervene in Trump v IRS, USDC, SDFL Case No. 1.26-cv-20609 (Anti-Weaponization Fund) U.S. Judge Kathleen Williams and Magistrate Judge Enjoliqué Lett presiding.

In Dunn v Trump et al, USCD, District of Columbia Case No. 1.26-cv-01719, U.S. Judge Richard Leon presiding, two Capital Policemen, Harry Dunn and Daniel Hodges, sued over the Anti-Weaponization Fund. Officer Dunn and Officer Hodges have a right to know the FEC failed to act on a legitimate Complaint of Election Fraud in the 2020 Presidential Election.

Harry Dunn and Daniel Hodges (photo added)

In Andrew Floyd v DOJ, USDC, Eastern Division Virginia, Case No. 1.26-cv-1399, Plaintiffs Andrew Floyd, Jonathan Caravello, City of New Haven, National Abortion Federation, and Common Cause, contend "The Department of Justice and the Department of Treasury have created a $1.776 billion slush fund—from taxpayer dollars—to dispense payment to those the Trump-Vance administration favors. Since its inception, this fund has been on a collision course with the United States Constitution." No. My complaint shows a lawyer admitted to practice law is an officer of the court, and a member of the judicial branch of government, and constitutionally prohibited from serving as vice president. That means J.D. Vance, as a lawyer admitted to practice, should be removed from office. U.S. Judge Leonie Brinkema and Magistrate Judge Ivan Davis are presiding.

In two other cases, Perkins Coie LLP v DOJ et al, DC Circuit Court of Appeal No. 25-5241, Trial Judge Beryl Howell; USDC, District of Columbia, Case No. 1:25-cv-00716-BAH, and American Bar Association (ABA) v Trump DOJ et al, DC Circuit Court of Appeal No. 25-5128 Trial Judge Amir H. Ali, USDC-District of Columbia Case No. 1.25-cv-01888, each of those cases argue separation of powers prevents President Trump from jurisdiction over lawyers and law firms. The ABA even cites the same case I rely upon: Ex parte Garland, 71 U.S. 333 (1866).

The enclosed Transcript of the CBS News 60 Minutes episode with Scott Pelly, The Rule of Law, May 2, 2025, shows this quote by John Keker: 

"John Keker: We don't have to agree on politics but we do have to agree that the legal profession has to protect the rule of law in the United States. Which means lawyers and judges need to be independent from the executive branch. [Yes; see Ex parte Garland, 71 U.S. 333 (1866)]"

This means the executive branch and the legislate branch also need to be independent of lawyers and judges. Ex parte Garland held that lawyers are governed by the judicial branch. But law firms are something different. The enclosed Affidavit of Kenneth L. Marvin of The Florida Bar shows the Bar only regulates lawyers, but not law firms. The affidavit is dated October 7, 2010, during the foreclosure crisis when "foreclosure mill" law firms were taking the homes of Americans without due process. The Florida Bar ignored wrongdoing by foreclosure mills on that basis. President Trump (as the executive) therefore has an oversight duty of law firms. Of course, law firms only want other lawyers to regulate them, lawyers admitted to practice like Joe Biden and Kamala Harris. The latter scheme offends the Constitution of the United States. 

I affirm that Neil J. Gillespie is my legal name. I have both court documents and drivers license that can attest to this. If there is any question, these documents will be provided for verification.

Neil J. Gillespie, Treasurer 
NEIL J. GILLESPIE FOR PRESIDENT, Id: C00627810
NEIL J GILLESPIE, Candidate ID: P60022993"

Perhaps President Trump can protect the citizens of Florida from lawfirms like Johnson Dalal and Morgan & Morgan, since The Florida Bar does not have jurisdiction. Also see,

Death of Sarah Thompson, age 35, May 12, 2021, City of Ocala, Marion County, Florida

DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT CASE 2020-CF-2417

Earlier today I provided you "cc" my email to Terri Parker, Investigative Reporter, WPBF 25 News, praising her excellent investigative reporting on the misuse of Florida's Security of Communications Act by the legal profession. The email is forwarded below. Thank you.

Sincerely,
/s/
Neil J. Gillespie (signature block edited) 
Neil J. Gillespie for US Senate
https://neilgillespie4senate.blogspot.com/
No Party Affiliation (NPA)
Florida Candidate ID: 89955
FEC Committee ID: C00943399
FEC Candidate ID: S6FL00863

UPDATE:  Florida Bar Opens Disciplinary Probe Into Trump's Attorney. Florida attorney Alejandro Brito, Bar # 98442.

Daily Business Review
Law.com July 23, 2026

The Florida Bar has opened a disciplinary file on President Donald Trump’s attorney Alejandro Brito after the federal judge overseeing the president's suit against the Internal Revenue Service referred him for discipline, the bar's communications director confirmed to Law.com Thursday.

"We can confirm that a file has been opened," Communications Director Jennifer Krell Davis wrote in a Thursday email.

Brito was referred to the bar by U.S. District Judge for the Southern District of Florida Kathleen M. Williams as part of her scathing order in Trump v. IRS last week, which held the president brought the suit in an attempt to "manipulate the judicial process" and blocked the use of the $1.8 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund" created to settle it.

"This lawsuit was not brought to vindicate rights; it was brought to manipulate the judicial process to pursue benefits unavailable in litigation because the parties were not adverse," Williams's July 13 order reads.

Brito did not immediately return Law.com’s request for comment Thursday afternoon.

Trump sued the IRS in January, alleging systemic failures allowed his confidential tax returns to be leaked and published. Williams closed the case in May after the parties voluntarily moved for its dismissal, announcing they’d entered a settlement agreement that shielded Trump from tax audits and set up a $1.776 billion fund for individuals who have "suffered weaponization and lawfare."

Williams's July 13 order blocks parties from using or referring to the fund. On top of the sanctions against Brito, acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche and associate U.S. Attorney General Stanley Woodward, Williams ordered that monetary sanctions be imposed.

Brito is representing Trump in many of the president's personal matters pending in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Florida, including Trump's defamation suit against the British Broadcasting Corporation and his "debanking" claims against JPMorgan Chase Bank and CEO Jamie Dimon read more 

 Above The Law: The Trump Slush Fund Is Dead. Long Live The Trump Slush Fund.