US judge halts Trump's 'anti-weaponization' fund
May 29, 2026
A US judge on Friday temporarily blocked the controversial "anti-weaponization" fund that President Donald Trump's administration had set up last week, as part of a Justice Department settlement in Trump's lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS).
The $1.776 billion (€1.522 billion) fund has been criticized as a scheme to funnel taxpayer dollars to Trump loyalists.
What did the judge say?
US District Judge Leonie Brinkema of the Eastern District of Virginia ruled that the US government was barred from "taking any further action" to set up or operate the fund while the judge hears additional legal arguments.
The White House declined to comment on the judge's ruling, referring all questions to the Justice Department, which didn't immediately respond to a request for comment.
Skye Perryman, the head of Democracy Forward, the group that challenged the fund in court, said the temporary halt was "a victory for transparency, the rule of law, and the American people."
"No administration has the authority to spend public money through a political rewards program," Perryman added.
A June 12 hearing is scheduled to consider whether the government's work on the fund should remain frozen for longer.
What is Trump's 'anti-weaponization fund'
The Justice Department created the fund as part of the settlement of Trump's civil lawsuit against the IRS, where Trump had sought billions in compensation over the leak of his tax returns by a former government contractor.
With the "anti-weaponization" fund, a panel chosen mainly by Trump's Justice Deaprtment would compensate people who suffered from what Trump called government "weaponization" and "lawfare" by his predecessor, the Biden administration.
A fierce backlash ensued when the fund was announced, with both Republicans and Democrats grilling acting Attorney General Todd Blanche over the possibility that even violent rioters at the US Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, would be entitled to compensation.
Opponents of the fund say it has no clear legal basis, little oversight and would be used to reward Trump loyalists, including defendants convicted of crimes.
Edited by: Wesley Dockery