The Trump administration’s so-called “Anti-Weaponization Fund” has been indefinitely blocked by a federal judge, adding to mounting scrutiny surrounding the controversial payment scheme.
Judge Leonie Brinkema of the Eastern District of Virginia halted the fund, expressing clear scepticism toward assurances from Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche that the matter was effectively moot.
The judge notably declined to take Blanche’s word at face value, pointing out that his statements were not made under penalty of perjury and therefore carried no formal legal weight.
The DOJ announced the $1.776 billion fund in May without congressional authorisation, with the stated intention of paying out Trump allies, including individuals convicted in connection with the January 6 Capitol riot.
Blanche, who previously served as Donald Trump’s personal lawyer before taking on the role of Acting Attorney General, has been named as the fund’s administrator, a fact that drew immediate criticism from legal observers.
Politico uncovered a significant conflict of interest at the heart of the fund’s troubled rollout, centring on Patrick Davis, the Senate-confirmed Assistant Attorney General for Legislative Affairs.
Davis, whose role placed him in charge of selling the fund’s merits to Congress, quietly informed colleagues in May that he personally intended to file a claim against the very fund he was meant to promote.
His potential claim stems from his earlier career as a senior aide to Senator Chuck Grassley, during which time his phone and email records were subpoenaed as part of the Russiagate investigation, something Davis only learned about years after the fact.
According to Politico, Davis “raised his plan to file a claim with others at the DOJ in May because he viewed it as a conflict,” but colleagues were alarmed, “in part because he was responsible for communicating the department’s reasons for setting up the fund to lawmakers.”
One official told Politico that “[Davis] has relationships with the senators, and it was a very tough time for him to back out.”
A separate official was more blunt, telling Politico: “It was a hard issue and he just didn’t want to deal with it and didn’t want to be there to address the difficult conversations.”
A DOJ spokesperson told Politico that Davis had temporarily recused himself “out of an abundance of caution,” and that it was later determined the recusal was not necessary for “a number of reasons.”
The episode has deepened questions about the fund’s legitimacy and the internal tensions within a Justice Department managing an increasingly complicated political and legal landscape.