DOJ Declines to Confirm Status of Anti-weaponization Fund
WHO:
CNN - Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Associate Attorney General Stan Woodward, U.S. District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema, President Trump.
CBS News - Andrew Block, senior counsel to Woodward, Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, plaintiffs including a former federal prosecutor, the city of New Haven, Connecticut, and two nonprofit groups: Common Cause and the National Abortion Federation.
WHAT:
CNN - The Justice Department stated that the declarations requested by Judge Brinkema were “unnecessary” and raised “serious separation of powers concerns.”
ABC News - The Justice Department reiterated that the fund is "not going forward, period," as stated by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche.
CBS News - Andrew Block, senior counsel to Woodward, argued that the court's demands for declarations were "unnecessary" and that the presumption of mootness should not rely on compelled testimony from senior officials.
CNN - The Justice Department declined a judge’s request for a court declaration confirming that the anti-weaponization fund is not moving forward.
ABC News - The DOJ refused to issue a signed declaration verifying that it no longer intends to pursue President Trump’s "Anti-Weaponization Fund."
CBS News - The controversial fund was valued at $1.8 billion and aimed to compensate individuals claiming to be victims of government "weaponization."
CBS News - Judge Brinkema granted a preliminary injunction blocking the Justice Department from creating or operating the program.
WHERE:
CNN - The case is taking place in Alexandria, Virginia.
CBS News - The lawsuit was filed in a federal district court in Alexandria, Virginia.
WHEN:
CBS News - The judge's order for the declaration was issued on June 12.
CBS News - The fund was created as part of a settlement from a civil lawsuit President Trump filed against the IRS in January.
WHY:
CBS News - Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, criticized the administration for not providing a declaration under oath regarding the fund's status, indicating a lack of compliance with the court's directives.
CNN - The fund arose from a settlement of a lawsuit President Trump filed against the IRS, which was considered legally dubious.
CBS News - The fund faced backlash from Republicans due to concerns that individuals involved in the January 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol could receive payouts.
HOW:
CBS News - The Justice Department claimed that none of the five members required to establish and administer the fund had been appointed, supporting their argument that the program had not been set up and is not going forward.
CNN - The Justice Department argued that the judge's demand for declarations from senior officials raised "serious separation of powers concerns."
CBS News - Andrew Block stated that the declaration is "unnecessary" and that the compelled testimony of senior officials implicates separation of powers concerns.
(UPDATED June 19, 2026 23:18 UTC)
The Justice Department has stated that the declarations requested by Judge Brinkema are “unnecessary” and raise “serious separation of powers concerns.” Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche emphasized that the fund in question is "not going forward, period," while Andrew Block, senior counsel to Woodward, argued that the court's demands for declarations should not rely on compelled testimony from senior officials. Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, criticized the administration for failing to provide a declaration under oath regarding the fund's status, suggesting a lack of compliance with the court's directives.
--
(UPDATED June 19, 2026 21:21 UTC)
In a significant legal development, the Justice Department has declined a judge's request for a declaration confirming that President Trump’s controversial "Anti-Weaponization Fund," valued at $1.8 billion, will not move forward. This fund, which aimed to compensate individuals claiming to be victims of government "weaponization," has faced backlash, particularly from Republicans concerned about potential payouts to those involved in the January 6 Capitol attack. Judge Leonie M. Brinkema has granted a preliminary injunction blocking the program, citing serious separation of powers concerns raised by the Justice Department regarding the demand for declarations from senior officials.