A federal judge in Virginia has extended a block on the Trump administration’s nearly $1.8 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” saying the government’s public statements that the program would not move forward were not enough to end the legal dispute.
U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema issued the order after previously stopping the administration from distributing money through the fund while litigation continues. The fund was created as part of a settlement connected to President Donald Trump’s lawsuit over the leak of his tax returns.
The Justice Department had announced the $1.776 billion fund as a way to compensate people who claimed they were harmed by what the administration described as politically motivated government “weaponization.” Critics called it an improper taxpayer-funded payout system that operated outside normal congressional spending safeguards.
The fund drew immediate bipartisan criticism after it was announced. Opponents argued that it could send public money to Trump allies and political supporters without enough oversight. The administration later said the fund was no longer moving forward, but Brinkema said those assurances were not legally binding.
TRENDING TODAY
According to reports, Brinkema said she would lift the block if Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent submit sworn declarations under penalty of perjury confirming that the fund will not proceed. Until then, the injunction remains in place.
The judge said public comments by administration officials were not enough, especially because the government had not formally rescinded the order that created the fund. She also noted that Trump had continued to speak positively about the idea, adding uncertainty over whether the plan was truly dead.
Blanche told Congress last week that the fund was not moving forward. But he declined to put that promise in writing, and that refusal became a key issue in court. Brinkema ruled that the administration must provide a formal commitment if it wants the case treated as moot.
The lawsuit challenging the fund was brought by plaintiffs represented by Democracy Forward. The plaintiffs include Common Cause, the National Abortion Federation, the city of New Haven, a former federal prosecutor who worked on January 6 cases, and a California professor who had been acquitted of attacking immigration agents.
They argue that the fund was unconstitutional because it attempted to create a large compensation program without proper congressional authorization. They also say the program could be used to reward political allies and punish perceived enemies.
The administration has defended the settlement framework as lawful and has argued that the challenge should end because the fund is no longer being pursued. But Brinkema rejected the idea that verbal statements alone were enough to remove the risk of future payments.
The dispute began with Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS and Treasury Department over the leak of his tax information. Trump alleged that federal officials failed to protect confidential tax records that were later reported by media outlets. As part of the settlement, the administration created the “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” which would have been financed through the federal judgment fund.
The judgment fund is a permanent appropriation used to pay certain legal settlements and judgments against the federal government. Critics argued that using it to create a broad political compensation fund was unprecedented and potentially unlawful.
The fund was designed to accept claims from people who said they had been targeted by a “weaponized” federal government. It was expected to operate through 2028 and report periodically to the attorney general.
But after public backlash and legal challenges, the administration began saying the plan was being abandoned. The court’s latest order shows that judges may require more than political statements when taxpayer funds and constitutional spending powers are involved.
The ruling does not decide the final legality of the fund. Instead, it keeps the block in place while the case continues. No claims have been accepted and no payments have been made from the fund, according to reports.
The case raises broader questions about executive power, federal settlements and whether a president’s administration can create a major compensation program through litigation rather than through Congress.
Supporters of the administration’s broader “anti-weaponization” message say federal agencies have been used unfairly against conservatives and Trump allies. Critics say the fund itself was an example of political misuse of government power.
The court’s order also leaves part of the broader IRS settlement untouched. Reports say a separate portion of the agreement involving tax-audit protections for Trump, his family and related entities remains in place, even as the payout fund is blocked.
For now, Brinkema’s message is simple: if the administration says the fund is dead, senior officials must say so formally and under oath.
Why It Matters
This matters because the case involves nearly $1.8 billion in taxpayer money and whether the executive branch can create a large compensation program without direct congressional approval.
It also matters because the fund was tied to Trump’s own IRS lawsuit, raising concerns from critics about conflicts of interest, political favoritism and public spending safeguards.
What Comes Next
The administration has one week to submit sworn declarations from Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent confirming the fund will not move forward. If they do, the judge said she may lift the order.
If they do not, the injunction will remain in place while the lawsuit continues. The court may then consider broader constitutional questions about the fund’s legality and the limits of executive settlement authority.
The fund was first promoted by conservative accounts as part of Trump’s settlement with the IRS, before a federal judge later blocked it and extended that order while litigation continues.
🚨 BREAKING — IT’S OFFICIAL: The Trump DOJ has just established a $1.776 BILLION Anti-Weaponization Fund to grant relief to Americans unfairly targeted and persecuted by the Biden admin
This is in exchange for 47 PERSONALLY dropping his $10B lawsuit against the IRS, originally… pic.twitter.com/gXn94u71WC
— Eric Daugherty (@EricLDaugh) May 18, 2026
