President Donald Trump expressed uncertainty about the fate of the taxpayer-funded initiative, which could have paid out to those who assaulted police during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol.
President Trump’s anti-weaponization fund faced growing political challenges
The rare criticism from Republican lawmakers adds two legal challenges to the political and legal storm surrounding President Trump’s $1.8 billion IRS settlement.
WASHINGTON – The legal battle over the Trump administration’s proposed $1.776 billion anti-weaponization fund continues, with Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche saying the Justice Department will not move forward with administering the fund, but may defend against multiple lawsuits in court.
On June 5, the Justice Department is scheduled to file its response to a lawsuit filed by a federal judge in Virginia that temporarily blocked the funds.
“Despite what we’re doing in these cases, defending our rights and trying to make sure our rights are protected, we’re not going to move forward with the fund,” Blanche said at a June 2 Congressional hearing.
President Donald Trump himself has been confused as to whether the taxpayer-funded effort, which could have paid off those who assaulted police during the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, is really over. In comments to reporters from the Oval Office on June 3, he said he didn’t know if the fund had been abolished or was simply put on hold, but he also referred to it in the past tense.
“I’ll have to ask my lawyer, but I don’t know,” Trump said. “As far as I’m concerned, the Weaponization Fund has been great.”
Sens. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) and Bill Cassidy (R-Louisiana) jointly wrote in a June 3 court document to the judge who suspended the fund that it was an illegal attempt to circumvent Congress and potentially fund violent insurrectionists. They said even if the Justice Department canceled the funds now, it could pursue them later.
“The Anti-Weaponization Fund presents a threat to our constitutional democracy that this court has never been asked to confront,” the senators wrote.
“Less than a week after the Department of Justice announced the fund, the defendants who stormed the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, began lining up for their share,” they added.
The lawsuit was filed by several plaintiffs, including a former federal prosecutor for crimes committed during the Jan. 6 attack.
How did the fund come about?
The Justice Department announced the creation of the fund as part of a $10 billion settlement of a lawsuit brought by Trump and his two oldest sons against the Internal Revenue Service for failing to protect their tax returns. The contractor leaked tax return information from 2019 to 2020, along with that of hundreds of thousands of other taxpayers.
Later, Justice Department lawyers and lawyers for Trump and his two sons settled the case, agreeing for the government to establish a fund and relieve the family of any previous tax liability.
Both the fund and the tax portion of the settlement have drawn protests from government watchdogs. The New York Times reported in 2020 that President Trump is engaged in a decade-long audit battle with the IRS over his $72.9 million tax refund claim. Losing the battle could cost the company more than $100 million, according to the Times.
Other challenges to the fund
The Justice Department faces numerous other legal and political challenges to the fund.
Capitol Police officers have filed a lawsuit in federal court in Washington, D.C., over the initiative, arguing that the fund could further embolden people already facing harassment and death threats.
A former Department of Veterans Affairs employee has filed a lawsuit in federal court in California, saying he was targeted by the Trump administration for political speech and has an interest in ensuring that funds are limited to the true victims of improper weaponization.
In addition, 35 former federal judges asked the Miami federal judge who closed Trump’s case against the IRS to reopen the case. They said in court filings that the government had fought “nearly identical claims” filed by others against the Internal Revenue Service, and that the disparate treatment of Mr. Trump showed the settlement was inappropriate.
The judge in the case has given Trump until June 12 to respond to allegations that he improperly colluded with the Justice Department. Today is the day the Justice Department will hold a hearing in the Virginia case, which could determine whether the fund will be legally blocked for an extended period of time as litigation continues.
Blanche said the Justice Department would not move forward with administering the fund, even though it may continue to defend it in court, following pushback from Senate Republicans who said they would not pass an immigration enforcement spending bill until the fund was limited or eliminated.
