A federal judge recently rejected a request for a temporary restraining order concerning the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) suspended $1.776 billion anti-weaponization fund, leaving its status uncertain.
U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush, turned down the nonprofit watchdog group’s appeal. The Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) had filed a lawsuit against the fund shortly after the Justice Department announced it on May 22.
During the hearing, it came to light that while the fund is currently on hold, the DOJ has not officially canceled the order that created it.
CREW claims that former President Trump engaged in a “sham settlement” with the IRS, leading to the establishment of a “slush fund” that benefitted certain allies. The lawsuit describes the fund’s creation as a blatant act of presidential corruption, arguing that it was created without Congressional approval and violates important transparency and accountability standards.
The Justice Department responded by asserting that CREW’s lawsuit is irrelevant, as it pertains to a fund that hasn’t even been established or put into operation. They mentioned that very little has happened regarding the fund—no members have been appointed, no claims processes defined, and no money has been distributed to any potential claimants.
In reply, CREW insisted that the situation warranted judicial intervention. They argued that the DOJ needs to formally revoke the order for the fund’s creation.
During the hearing, Judge Leon pressed DOJ attorney Andrew Bullock on why the government wasn’t rescinding the order, to which Bullock replied that the acting attorney general stated the fund wasn’t moving forward.
Leon expressed his dissatisfaction with the ongoing controversy, referencing Trump’s comments suggesting that the fund might still get approval but hinting that it might be for political maneuvering. He also cautioned Bullock to not underestimate the court.
CREW has filed for a preliminary injunction as well, which Leon will rule on in a subsequent decision.
This anti-weaponization fund is already facing challenges, having been blocked from considering claims or payments in a prior ruling by Federal Judge Leonie Brinkema. She prohibited the Trump administration from proceeding with the fund’s establishment while the lawsuit is ongoing.
Brinkema emphasized her decision was crucial to avoid distributing any irrevocable funds from the fund as the case is still pending. Her injunction is set to expire soon, allowing for further arguments on whether to extend it.
The DOJ had announced the fund, meant to address claims from those allegedly harmed by weapon use or other legal repercussions, on May 18. This initiative was said to parallel previous government funds. While it coincided with Trump’s decision to stop litigation against the IRS, the fund’s creation wasn’t directly tied to that decision.
The fund faced backlash from Senate Republicans, who were looking into a Democratic-led amendment aimed at repealing it. This disagreement jeopardized Republican efforts to pass a bill for immigration enforcement funding. In response, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche indicated at a House Appropriations Subcommittee meeting that the DOJ would be eliminating the fund soon.
On the same day, Senate Majority Leader John Thune confirmed this decision, stating the fund was effectively “off the table.”
Blanche elaborated that the fund’s intention was in line with Trump’s long-discussed goal of offering compensation to citizens harmed by governmental uses of weapons.
Yet, Trump continues to leave the fund’s future ambiguous. When pressed by reporters about its status, he remarked that the situation was unclear and suggested they consult their lawyers. However, he still expressed his support for the fund, calling it immensely important and highlighting the need for it to be approved.
Furthermore, in a recent interview, he reiterated that a weaponization fund is a positive concept, with many Republicans in agreement. He emphasized the serious consequences faced by individuals targeted by unscrupulous politicians.
In discussions with the Daily Caller, Oversight Project President Mike Howell indicated that potential beneficiaries of the fund could include Christians facing governmental scrutiny, pro-lifers prosecuted under the FACE Act, and defendants linked to the January 6 events.
