A federal judge in Virginia on Friday extended its hold on the Trump administration’s “anti-arms fund,” frustrated that the Justice Department would not say, under penalty of perjury, whether the fund was truly dead.
U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema said “none of these statements” by Blanche or the president “were made under penalty of perjury.”
Earlier this month, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche told House lawmakers“We are not moving forward with the fund, period,” but the next day, President Donald Trump told reporters: “I don’t know”, when asked if the fund was suspended or terminated.
Brinkema also took aim at Justice Department attorney Andrew Block, who did not explain why the Justice Department did not formally rescind its memo regarding the creation of the “anti-arms fund.”
“I don’t have the opportunity to speak directly to the attorney general,” Block said.
“I can’t believe that given the importance of this question, you don’t have an answer,” Brinkema retorted. She added that “there is a huge gap in the record” if we don’t have an answer to this question.
The current lawsuit stems from the Trump administration’s announcement last month that it planned to create an “anti-armament fund” of $1.8 billion. aimed at compensating people who have “suffered militarization and legal warfare” at the hands of the federal government.
The fund could have been used to pay those who were indicted and later pardoned by Trump for their action on January 6, 2021 at the United States Capitol. In an interview last week with NBC News, President did not exclude pay the January 6 participants who were later accused of assaulting law enforcement officers.
Brinkema said Friday she was concerned that if this fund wasn’t truly dead, it could come back in a different form.
“When the president of the United States says he’s going to be very upset if something happens, that’s a very good incentive” to do something, Brinkema said.
Brinkema said the public also doesn’t really feel like the fund is dead — she said the federal court in Alexandria actually received a request to open the fund, which she said it returned to sender. “We don’t accept applications,” she said dryly.
But she said she believes the public is largely opposed to the idea of $1.8 billion in taxpayer dollars being diverted to people who committed crimes against federal law enforcement officers, calling it “problematic.”
Brinkema granted the plaintiffs a preliminary injunction until further notice, but said, “If the government really means what they mean,” she will give the government a week to present a declaration from Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent declaring that under penalty of perjury, the fund is truly dead.
Following Friday’s injunction, the plaintiffs applauded Brinkema’s decision.
In a statement, Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, said: “Despite the administration’s shifting explanations about the future of the slush fund, the court’s order ensures that taxpayer dollars cannot be distributed through this illegal scheme while the courts fully consider the serious constitutional issues at stake. We look forward to pursuing this challenge on behalf of our clients.”
Omar Noureldin, Common Cause’s senior vice president for policy and litigation, said: “Today’s decision is a massive victory, ensuring that hard-earned taxpayer dollars stay out of the hands of the president’s friends and the people who violently attacked law enforcement on January 6 while we seek justice for American taxpayers in court. We have successfully locked down the president’s personal slush fund for now, and we will keep up the pressure until it is permanently closed.
Former federal prosecutor Andrew Floyd, who was part of a lawsuit to block the fund, said: “I am heartened that the injunction continues to prevent $1.776 billion of taxpayer dollars from being used to pay those who attacked our democracy. I will pursue this litigation to ensure that this unconstitutional fund does not erase the accountability imposed by impartial judges and juries – and the hard-earned work of victims, witnesses, law enforcement officers. law and the prosecutors who delivered it.”
