Tom Goldstein, co-founder of SCOTUSblog, faced a series of setbacks in his efforts to reduce the 22 federal tax charges against him. On October 7, 2025, Judge Lydia Kay Griggsby of the U.S. District Court for the District of Maryland denied several of Goldstein’s pre-trial motions, including his attempt to dismiss four counts as time-barred. The judge determined that the statute of limitations issue involved factual disputes appropriate for trial, thereby preserving the government’s case in its entirety.
Goldstein’s indictment, filed in January 2025, includes charges of tax evasion, aiding and assisting in the preparation of false tax returns, willful failure to pay taxes, and making false statements on loan applications. Prosecutors allege that between 2016 and 2022, Goldstein used funds from his law firm, Goldstein & Russell PC, to cover personal expenses, including substantial gambling debts. Additionally, he is accused of creating fictitious positions at his firm to conceal payments to at least a dozen women with whom he had personal relationships, and of misreporting millions in gambling income to the IRS.
In response to Goldstein’s motions to dismiss certain charges, the government argued that his actions constituted clear affirmative acts of tax evasion. They highlighted instances where Goldstein allegedly diverted law firm fees to third parties to pay personal debts and used firm funds for personal expenditures, all while providing false information to his accountants and the IRS. The prosecution emphasized that these actions were deliberate attempts to obscure his true taxable income.
Further complicating his legal challenges, Goldstein’s request for hybrid representation—seeking to act as his own attorney alongside his legal counsel—was denied by Judge Griggsby. The court found no special need justifying such an arrangement, noting that Goldstein was already represented by competent attorneys.
Goldstein’s trial is scheduled for early next year, where he will face the full array of charges as initially filed. The case continues to draw attention due to Goldstein’s prominence in the legal community and the serious nature of the allegations.