The Justice Department will pause work on Trump’s disputed anti-weaponization fund after a court order as voters in six states hold primaries.
The Justice Department says it will stop work for now on the Trump administration’s disputed “anti-weaponization” fund after a federal judge temporarily blocked the program, a pause that comes amid legal challenges and rare pushback from Republicans in Congress.
The fund was designed to provide taxpayer-funded payouts to people who claim they were targeted by the federal government. It has been described with slightly different shorthand — $1.776 billion, more than $1.7 billion and nearly $1.8 billion — but the accounts refer to the same Trump administration program. Critics in both parties have raised concerns that the money could go to allies of President Trump, including people convicted in connection with the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol.
The Justice Department said on X that it “disagrees strongly” with the ruling by U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema of the Eastern District of Virginia, but added: “The Department will abide by the Court’s ruling.”
Brinkema’s order, issued Friday, temporarily prevents the department from taking further action to create or operate the fund while she considers whether to grant longer-term relief. The order bars the department from transferring money into the fund, reviewing claims or making payments. A hearing is set for June 12.
The case before Brinkema was brought by a former federal prosecutor involved in Jan. 6-related cases and other plaintiffs. Separately, the fund has drawn scrutiny because it was created as part of a settlement of Trump’s civil lawsuit tied to the release of his tax returns.
The court-ordered pause also lands in the middle of a political fight on Capitol Hill. Senate Republicans had been weighing guardrails on the fund after members voiced concerns to acting Attorney General Todd Blanche in a closed-door meeting last month. Democrats, meanwhile, have said they will try to force votes against the fund and are backing legislation intended to shut it down.
Senate Majority Leader John Thune said Monday that he had spoken with Trump about the issue over the weekend. “I do think the best way to handle it is if the administration decides to shut it down themselves,” Thune told reporters.
Voters in six states — California, Iowa, Montana, New Jersey, South Dakota and New Mexico — are holding primaries Tuesday, with California and Iowa drawing particular attention because of competitive governor’s races and potential consequences for control of Congress this fall.
California’s system sends the top two candidates to the general election regardless of party. The state is also being watched because voters approved new congressional district lines in November that were designed to weaken and potentially unseat five current Republican House members. NPR reported that three of those seats are viewed as easier Democratic targets, while two others are expected to be tougher fights.
The broader primary season is also renewing debate over closed, single-party primaries. Critics say those contests exclude independent voters and can reward partisan loyalty in districts where the primary effectively decides the seat. NPR noted that more than 90% of House seats are now considered safe for one party or the other, giving primaries outsized influence over who serves in Congress.
The next immediate markers are Tuesday’s primary results and the June 12 court hearing on the Justice Department fund, which will determine whether the temporary block becomes a longer-running legal barrier.
Comments (0)