Trump's $1.8B fund secrecy

President Donald Trump’s administration has created a $1.776 billion compensation fund with unusually broad discretion and unusually little public detail. The Justice Department announced on May 18 that the “Anti-Weaponization Fund” was part of a settlement of Trump’s lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax returns. Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump and the Trump Organization agreed to drop the case, and the department said the plaintiffs would receive a formal apology but no direct damages. The fund has become a flashpoint because the government has described its purpose in sweeping terms while leaving key operating rules unclear. The department said the fund will “provide a systematic process to hear and redress claims of others who suffered weaponization and lawfare,” and that it will have authority to award money or formal apologies. It also said quarterly reports will go to the attorney general and that any money left over when the fund ends will revert to the federal government. (justice.gov) ### Where did the $1.776 billion come from? The Justice Department said the money will come from the federal Judgment Fund, a permanent appropriation used to pay certain settlements and judgments against the government. The department said the Anti-Weaponization Fund “will receive $1.776 billion” and will stop processing claims no later than December 1, 2028. CBS News reported that the Judgment Fund was created by Congress in 1956 and that Congress later removed an earlier cap on claims. (justice.gov) CNBC reported that Trump got no personal cash payment in the settlement, but that the arrangement also gave Trump and his family members protection from IRS enforcement actions tied to their tax returns. The DOJ press release separately said Trump and the other plaintiffs would receive only a formal apology and no monetary damages. ### Who can actually apply for money? Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche told lawmakers there is “no partisan requirement” to file a claim, but he has not publicly laid out a full eligibility standard. (justice.gov) The Justice Department press release says submission of a claim is voluntary and that there are no partisan requirements. It does not specify award formulas, public application procedures, payout limits or a complete list of disqualifying conduct. (cnbc.com) At a Senate hearing on May 19, Blanche said it would be up to “commissioners” to determine who gets compensation. Politico reported that Blanche would not rule out the possibility that Jan. 6 defendants convicted of assaulting police could seek awards, and Vice President JD Vance later said cases would be reviewed on a “case-by-case basis.” The Hill reported Vance also said, “We’re not trying to give money to anybody who attacked a police officer.” (justice.gov) ### Why are lawmakers in both parties objecting? Senate Republicans began raising concerns almost immediately after the May 18 announcement. Politico reported that Senate Majority Leader John Thune said he was “not a big fan” of the fund, while Sen. Lisa Murkowski said she had “more questions than I’ve heard answers for.” The same report said Sens. Susan Collins and Jerry Moran pressed Blanche on how payouts would be managed and who might qualify. (politico.com) Democrats have attacked the fund more directly. The Hill reported that Rep. Jamie Raskin said Trump was trying to use taxpayer money for a “slush fund,” and CNBC reported that members of Congress have introduced legislation aimed at blocking the program. The Hill said the issue is expected to hang over lawmakers during the Memorial Day recess. ### What legal challenges has the fund already drawn? (politico.com) Two new lawsuits were filed on May 22 challenging the fund in federal courts in Washington and Virginia, CNBC reported. One suit was filed by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, and another was brought by plaintiffs including former federal prosecutor Andrew Floyd, professor Jonathan Caravello and the city of New Haven, Connecticut. The complaints argue, among other things, that the fund violates the Administrative Procedure Act; one also alleges constitutional violations and another raises a Freedom of Information Act claim. (thehill.com) The Hill separately reported that former Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn and Metropolitan Police officer Daniel Hodges sued to block the fund, arguing it could finance people involved in the Jan. 6 attack. Their suit called the program a “slush fund,” according to the report. ### How involved was Trump in setting it up? Trump said this week that he “wasn’t involved in the settlement,” but that account has been challenged by subsequent reporting. (cnbc.com) Zeteo reported on May 23 that sources said Trump was “involved,” was “kept in the loop,” and could have stopped the deal. Forbes also reported that Blanche denied Trump helped create the fund, while saying he was “confident” Trump’s lawyers conveyed the president’s wishes in negotiations. (thehill.com) The next public test is likely to come in court and on Capitol Hill. The Justice Department has said the five-member body overseeing the program will determine relief rules, and lawmakers are expected to continue pressing Blanche and the administration when Congress returns from recess. (cbsnews.com) (zeteo.com)