Judge extends block on Trump administration's anti-weaponization fund

A federal judge refused to let the Trump administration’s assurances stand on their own, extending a block on the proposed Anti-Weaponization Fund and forcing the White House to back away under oath if it wants the case to end. U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema said verbal claims that the fund was dead were not enough, a sharper test of executive credibility than the administration appeared prepared to meet.

The dispute centers on a May 18 order from Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche that established the fund, followed the next day by settlement materials saying the United States would send the Treasury Department the forms and documentation needed to direct $1,776,000,000 into a designated account. The fund emerged from a settlement resolving Donald Trump’s lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his 2019 and 2020 tax returns, and critics said the money looked like a taxpayer-financed payout that could aid Trump allies, including some involved in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot.

Brinkema first temporarily blocked the government from moving ahead on May 29 in the Eastern District of Virginia and set a June 12 hearing to decide whether the injunction should remain in place. By then, the Justice Department had told the court and Congress that the fund was not moving forward, but the judge still was not satisfied. She gave Blanche and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent one week to submit sworn declarations stating that the fund would not proceed, and she signaled she would drop the matter if the administration more definitively disavowed the project.

The hearing turned on more than the paperwork itself. It became a separation-of-powers test of whether the court could trust the executive branch to honor its own assurances after creating the fund in settlement language and then trying to walk it back. Plaintiffs argued that the government’s verbal assurances were not enough to moot the lawsuits, especially because President Trump continued to publicly support the idea even after Blanche told lawmakers, “We are not moving forward with the fund. Period.”

Congress has only sharpened the pressure. Senate Republicans narrowly defeated efforts to formally kill the fund in broader legislation, including a Democratic amendment from Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer that would have codified Blanche’s promise. With bipartisan backlash lingering and questions still hanging over whether the May 18 settlement was ever formally rescinded, Brinkema’s order turned the fight into a blunt question of executive accountability: if the administration wants the court to stand down, it will have to say so under oath.