Trump's anti-weaponization fund faces court challenges

Overview

A federal judge in Alexandria, Virginia, froze a $1.776 billion Justice Department fund on May 29 and barred the government from even continuing to build it. The pot of money was created to pay people who say past administrations weaponized the government against them.

The fund traces back to a lawsuit President Trump filed against his own IRS in January, then settled in May for $1.776 billion paid into a new claims program his Justice Department controls. Plaintiffs include a former January 6 prosecutor, the city of New Haven, and a watchdog group. They argue the fund is a taxpayer-funded payout to the president's allies, drawn from an account Congress never authorized for this purpose.

Why it matters

If the fund survives in court, a president can sue his own administration, settle with himself, and route billions of public dollars to political allies without a vote in Congress.

Play on this story Voices Debate Predict Higher or Lower

Key Indicators

$1.776B

Size of the fund

Drawn from the federal Judgment Fund to pay claimants who say they were targeted by past administrations.

$10B

Trump's original demand

The amount Trump and the Trump Organization sought in their lawsuit against the IRS before the settlement.

Commissioners

Four appointed by the attorney general, one chosen in consultation with congressional leaders.

Federal lawsuits filed

One in the Eastern District of Virginia, one in the District of Columbia.

June 12

Next hearing

Judge Brinkema will decide whether to extend the freeze into a longer preliminary injunction.

Voices

Curated perspectives — historical figures and your fellow readers.

Ever wondered what historical figures would say about today's headlines?

Play

Exploring all sides of a story is often best achieved with Play.

Predict 4 ways this could play out. Contrarian picks score more — points lock when the scenario resolves. Log in to play

Higher or Lower Two numbers from this story. Guess which is bigger. 5 rounds to set a streak. Log in to play

Timeline Five events from this story — drag them oldest to newest. Log in to play

Connections Sixteen names from the news. Find the four hidden groups of four. Log in to play

People Involved

Leonie M. Brinkema

Issued the temporary restraining order freezing the fund

Todd Blanche

Created the fund; defending it in court

Donald Trump

Plaintiff in the underlying lawsuit; potentially eligible to receive money from the fund

Charles Littlejohn

Serving five-year federal prison sentence

Andrew Floyd

Suing to block the fund

Justin Elicker

City joined the Virginia lawsuit

Organizations Involved

Department of Justice

Federal Agency

Created and administers the fund; defendant in both lawsuits

The DOJ both represented the IRS in Trump's lawsuit and signed the settlement that pays Trump's claimants out of the federal Judgment Fund.

Democracy Forward

Public-interest legal group

Lead counsel in the Virginia case

Democracy Forward represents Andrew Floyd, the city of New Haven, the National Abortion Federation, and Common Cause in the Eastern District of Virginia case.

Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington

Government watchdog

Plaintiff in a parallel D.C. lawsuit

CREW filed its own challenge in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia on similar grounds.

Anti-Weaponization Fund

Federal claims program

Operations frozen by court order

A claims program created by DOJ order to pay people who say they were targeted by past administrations.

Timeline

August 2019 May 2026

7 events Latest: Yesterday

Tap a bar to jump to that date

May 2026
Judge Brinkema freezes the fund
Latest Court Order

U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema bars DOJ from paying claims or continuing to build the fund. A hearing on extending the order is set for June 12.
Yesterday
Two lawsuits hit the fund
Legal

Democracy Forward sues in Virginia for Andrew Floyd, New Haven, the National Abortion Federation, and Common Cause. CREW files a parallel case in D.C.
May 22nd, 2026
DOJ settles the case and announces the fund
Settlement

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche dismisses the IRS lawsuit, creates a $1.776 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund, and orders the IRS to end audits of the Trump family.
May 18th, 2026
April 2026
Judge questions whether Trump can sue himself
Legal

Florida District Judge Kathleen M. Williams orders both sides to explain whether Trump and the agencies he runs are adverse enough for a real lawsuit.
April 24th, 2026
January 2026
Trump sues the IRS for $10 billion
Legal

President Trump, his sons, and the Trump Organization file suit against the IRS and Treasury over the Littlejohn leak. It is the first time a sitting president has sued his own administration.
January 29th, 2026
January 2024
Littlejohn sentenced to five years
Legal

A federal judge sentences Littlejohn to the maximum five-year prison term for unauthorized disclosure of tax information.
January 29th, 2024
August 2019
Littlejohn begins leaking tax returns
Origin

IRS contractor Charles Littlejohn copies Trump's returns and those of the 25 wealthiest Americans, sending them to The New York Times and ProPublica over the next year.
August 1st, 2019

Historical Context

3 moments from history that rhyme with this story — and how they unfolded.

August 1988

Civil Liberties Act and Japanese American redress (1988)

Congress passed and President Reagan signed a law giving $20,000 and a formal apology to each surviving Japanese American interned during World War II. About 82,000 people received payments totaling roughly $1.6 billion. The program was authorized, funded, and bounded by an act of Congress after a presidential commission documented the wrongs.

Then

Payments began in 1990 and ran for a decade. The program is now treated as the model for federal redress to a wronged group.

Now

It set the legal template: Congress decides who is owed, how much, and from what account, before any money moves.

Why this matters now

Plaintiffs argue the Anti-Weaponization Fund inverts that template. The executive branch alone decided who is owed, set the dollar amount, and tapped a fund Congress created for paying court judgments, not new claims programs.

September 2001

September 11th Victim Compensation Fund (2001)

Congress created the fund days after the 9/11 attacks to pay families of those killed and people injured, in exchange for waiving the right to sue the airlines. A special master, Kenneth Feinberg, set payment formulas. The fund eventually paid more than $7 billion to nearly 5,500 claimants in its first phase.

Then

The fund offered fast compensation and shielded the aviation industry from lawsuits that could have bankrupted it.

Now

It was reauthorized and expanded for first responders. It remains the standard reference for a large, executive-administered claims program with a clear statutory mandate.

Why this matters now

It shows what a legitimate compensation fund looks like: a statute from Congress, defined eligibility, named administrator, and clear funding source. The Trump fund has none of those from Congress.

1985-1987

Iran-Contra and the Boland Amendment (1985-1987)

Reagan administration officials, blocked by Congress from funding the Nicaraguan contras, ran an off-the-books operation financed by Iran arms sales and private donations. Congress had cut off contra aid through the Boland Amendment. The scheme was exposed in November 1986 and led to indictments of National Security Council and CIA officials.

Then

Independent counsel Lawrence Walsh secured 11 convictions; six defendants were later pardoned by President George H.W. Bush.

Now

It became the touchstone case for executive end-runs around the Appropriations Clause and shaped later fights over impoundment, recissions, and unauthorized spending.

Why this matters now

The current lawsuits rest on the same constitutional core: only Congress can decide how taxpayer money is spent. Plaintiffs argue DOJ used a settlement to do what Congress never authorized, just as Iran-Contra used arms sales to fund what Congress had barred.