A federal judge on Friday extended her block on the Trump administration’s “anti-weaponization” fund, frustrated that the Department of Justice has not said under penalty of perjury whether the fund is truly dead.
Judge Leonie Brinkema of the Eastern District of Virginia said “none of those statements” from acting Attorney General Todd Blanche or the president “have been made under the penalty of perjury.”
Earlier this month, Blanche told House lawmakers, “We’re not moving forward with the fund, period.” But the next day, President Donald Trump told reporters, “I don’t know,” when asked whether the fund was on hold or eliminated.
Brinkema also drilled down on Justice Department attorney Andrew Block, who has not answered why the DOJ has not formally rescinded its memo related to the creation of the “anti-weaponization” fund.
“I don’t have the ability to speak directly to the attorney general,” Block said.
“I can not believe, given the significance, you don’t have an answer,” Brinkema shot back. She added that “there’s a huge gap in the record” if we don’t have an answer to that question.
The ongoing lawsuit stems from the Trump administration’s announcement last month that it planned to set up a $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund aimed at paying people who have “suffered weaponization and lawfare” at the hands of the federal government.
If allowed to go forward, the fund could be used to pay those who were charged and later pardoned by Trump for their actions at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. In an interview last week with NBC News, the president didn’t rule out paying Jan. 6 attendees who were later charged with assaulting law enforcement.
Brinkema on Friday said she’s concerned that if this fund isn’t really dead, it might come back in a different form.
“I think the weaponization fund is a great idea, and so do many other Republicans,” Trump told NBC News’ Kristen Welker last week. “You have to get it approved. If they get it approved, that’s great. If they don’t get it approved, I’d be disappointed.”
Brinkema said that “when the president of the United States says he’s going to be pretty upset if something happens, that’s a pretty good incentive” for those working for him to do something.
Brinkema also said the public doesn’t have a real sense that the fund is dead. The federal court in Alexandria actually received an application to the fund, she said, adding that it was returned to sender. “We’re not accepting applications,” she said dryly.
But she did say she believes the public is largely against the idea of $1.8 billion in taxpayer dollars being diverted to people who committed crimes against law enforcement, calling it “problematic.”
Brinkema granted a preliminary injunction blocking the fund until further notice, but added another requirement: “If the government truly means what it means,” she said, she’s giving the government a week to come up with a declaration from Blanche and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent stating under penalty of perjury that the fund is really dead.
Following Friday’s injunction, plaintiffs in the case applauded Brinkema’s decision.
Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, said in a statement: “Despite the administration’s shifting explanations about the future of the slush fund, the court’s order ensures that taxpayer dollars cannot be distributed through this unlawful scheme while the courts fully consider the serious constitutional issues at stake. We look forward to continuing this challenge on behalf of our clients.”
Omar Noureldin, Common Cause’s senior vice president for policy and litigation, said: “Today’s ruling is a massive win, ensuring hard-earned tax dollars stay out of the hands of the President’s cronies and people who violently assaulted law enforcement on January 6 while we’re securing justice for American taxpayers in court. We’ve successfully locked the President’s personal slush fund for now, and we’ll keep the pressure on until it’s shut down for good.”
Former federal prosecutor Andrew Floyd, who was part of a lawsuit to block the fund, said: “I’m heartened that the injunction continues to prevent $1.776 billion in taxpayer money from being used to pay off those who attacked our democracy. I will continue this litigation to ensure that this unconstitutional fund does not erase the accountability imposed by judges and impartial jurors — and the hard-earned work of the victims, witnesses, law enforcement officers, and prosecutors who delivered it.”
