White House nixes ‘anti-weaponization’ fund panned by GOP and Democrats


This recording was made using enhanced software.

Full story

The White House is apparently scrapping plans for a nearly $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund to compensate allies of President Donald Trump after congressional pushback, including from Republicans.

The Trump administration declined to comment. However, it pointed to a statement in which the Justice Department agreed to abide by a judge’s ruling that blocked the fund’s creation.

QR code for SAN app download

Download the SAN app today to stay up-to-date with Unbiased. Straight Facts™.

Point phone camera here

In the statement, posted on Monday to X, the department said it “disagrees strongly with the decision on the Anti-Weaponization Fund.”

However, the statement said: “The Court stated that under no circumstances, may the Department of Justice proceed with the Anti-Weaponization Fund recently established in order to make up for the tremendous abuse, harm, and hate unfairly shown to so many people.”

The fund was part of a settlement that Trump reached with the Internal Revenue Service over a contract worker’s leak of his tax documents.

As part of the settlement, the Justice Department said it would administer the fund designed to compensate people who claim they were targeted by a “weaponized” justice system. The department did not describe in detail how it would assess individual claims.

The department expressed defiance as recently as Friday, when it said it would “not allow the policy preferences of judges to interfere with our efforts to provide restitution to victims of lawfare.”

However, both Republicans and Democrats opposed the fund.

Shortly before the Justice Department issued its statement, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said he hoped the White House would shut down the proposal.

“I made my views very clear on the issue,” Thune told reporters, according to The Hill. “I do think the best way to handle it is if the administration decides to shut it down themselves.”

Senate Democrats also launched multiple efforts to try to stop the fund. In a “Dear Colleague” letter on Monday, Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said Democrats were launching a coordinated effort to “kill the slush fund before one cent goes out the door.”

Dissension over the fund threatened efforts by Republicans to approve a measure that would fund immigration enforcement through the rest of Trump’s term. GOP leaders are trying to pass the funding bill without Democratic support through a budgetary process known as reconciliation.

“If Republicans return to reconciliation, we will be ready with amendments to shut the fund down,” Schumer wrote. “If they try to bury the issue, we will force them to the Senate floor. If they try to sneak behind appropriations, we will fight them there too.”


Round out your reading

Tags: , ,

SAN provides
Unbiased. Straight Facts.

Don't just take our word for it.


Certified balanced reporting

According to media bias experts at AllSides

AllSides Certified Balanced May 2025

Transparent and credible

Awarded a perfect reliability rating from NewsGuard

100/100

Welcome back to trustworthy journalism.

Find out more

Why this story matters

A proposed $1.8 billion Justice Department fund that would have paid claims from people alleging government targeting has been blocked by a court and is reportedly being abandoned.

No payouts from the fund

A federal judge blocked the fund's creation, and the Justice Department said it will abide by that ruling, meaning no claims will be processed or paid.

Bipartisan opposition drove outcome

Both Republican and Democratic lawmakers opposed the fund, with Senate Majority Leader Thune publicly calling on the White House to shut it down.

Reconciliation bill affected

Dissension over the fund threatened a separate Republican effort to pass immigration enforcement funding through the budget reconciliation process, according to the article.

Get the big picture

Synthesized coverage insights across 48 media outlets

Behind the numbers

The fund totaled $1.776 billion — a figure chosen as a nod to the country's founding year. Trump had originally sought $10 billion in his lawsuit against the IRS, plus $230 million in two additional civil claims related to the Russia investigation and the Mar-a-Lago search.

Community reaction

U.S. Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn and Washington Metropolitan Police Officer Daniel Hodges, who defended the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, filed suit arguing pardoned rioters could use payout money to organize further political violence.

Policy impact

The fund's collapse cleared a path for Senate Republicans to resume work on a stalled $72 billion immigration enforcement funding bill for ICE and Border Patrol, which had been blocked amid the controversy.

SAN provides
Unbiased. Straight Facts.

Don't just take our word for it.


Certified balanced reporting

According to media bias experts at AllSides

AllSides Certified Balanced May 2025

Transparent and credible

Awarded a perfect reliability rating from NewsGuard

100/100

Welcome back to trustworthy journalism.

Find out more

Bias comparison

  • Media outlets on the left frame the $1.8 billion fund as a “slush fund,” stressing “outrage,” “forced,” and “illegal” to portray favoritism, corruption, and a defeat for Trump, especially over possible payouts to allies and Jan. 6 rioters.
  • Not enough unique coverage from media outlets in the center to provide a bias comparison.
  • Media outlets on the right present it as an “anti-weaponization” effort undone by court orders and “fierce blowback,” using “dead” and “compliance” to stress procedural closure and GOP pressure.

Media landscape

Click on bars to see headlines

233 total sources

Key points from the Left

  • The Justice Department will stop work on the $1.776 billion anti-weaponization fund following a federal judge's temporary block amid ongoing legal challenges.
  • The fund was created as part of a settlement related to a $10 billion lawsuit filed by Trump against the IRS over leaked tax returns.
  • The fund faced bipartisan criticism, including concerns over misuse and potential compensation for individuals involved in the January 6 Capitol attack.
  • Due to political and legal pressure, plans are in place to halt the fund's operation and pursue legislative measures to restrict its future use.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Center

  • On Monday, the Justice Department announced it will comply with a federal court order and halt work on the nearly $1.8 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund, effectively shelving the program while litigation proceeds.
  • The administration established the fund as a settlement of President Donald Trump's $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service, providing monetary relief and formal apologies to those claiming government "weaponization."
  • Labeling the proposal a "slush fund," critics including Former Vice President Mike Pence argued it could compensate individuals involved in the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot, calling it "deeply offensive."
  • Federal judges in Virginia and Florida blocked the program last week, while Senate Republicans have threatened to stall broader immigration funding until the controversial initiative is permanently scrapped.
  • U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema has scheduled a June 12 hearing to determine whether the temporary restraining order remains in place, marking a pivotal juncture for the administration's contested initiative.

Report an issue with this summary

Key points from the Right

  • President Donald Trump plans to drop the Department of Justice's $1.8 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund amid scrutiny and legal challenges.
  • The Anti-Weaponization Fund aimed to compensate victims of government weaponization with apologies and monetary relief but is halted after a federal judge's ruling.
  • The DOJ disagrees strongly with the court's decision but will comply, stating the fund was open to anyone targeted regardless of political affiliation.
  • Senate Majority Leader John Thune appeared unaware of the White House's decision-making process regarding the fund's discontinuation.

Report an issue with this summary

Other (sources without bias rating):

Powered by Ground News™