Judge agrees to review Trump’s $1.8 billion ‘anti-weaponization’ fund : NPR

The legitimacy of the Trump administration’s $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization fund” is under scrutiny as a federal judge reviews it following questions raised by a group of former federal judges.

This fund was established after Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS over his leaked tax returns was settled out of court. Instead of proceeding to trial, an agreement was reached to create this taxpayer-supported fund.

On Friday, U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams in Florida ordered Trump’s legal team to respond to a motion filed by 35 former federal judges. These judges argued that Trump occupied dual roles as both plaintiff and defendant, having initiated the lawsuit as president and as head of the executive branch overseeing the IRS, making the lawsuit “a fraud on the court.”

The former judges, who were appointed by both Democratic and Republican presidents, claimed the lawsuit served as a pretext for misappropriating taxpayer money. They characterized it as collusion between Trump’s lawyers and the federal government and requested the judge to re-evaluate the settlement, asserting the court had been misled.

Initially, Williams, appointed by former President Barack Obama, dismissed Trump’s lawsuit following the settlement. However, in light of the motion by former judges, she stated that the court is “empowered to investigate serious misconduct.”

Meanwhile, another judge in Virginia has temporarily halted the fund, which Trump officials claim is intended to compensate Trump allies, Jan. 6 rioters, and others allegedly unjustly targeted. U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema in Virginia ordered on Friday that Trump officials cease establishing the fund to prevent irreversible disbursements.

Brinkema, appointed by former President Bill Clinton, scheduled a June 12 hearing to discuss whether the order should be extended.

The Justice Department did not issue a comment when contacted by NPR on Saturday. However, the department did state on social media, “We will do everything in our power to make whole those who were persecuted for political purposes.”

Legal expert: Fund ‘doesn’t address real legal injuries’

The orders represent an early legal challenge to the fund, which has sparked controversy on Capitol Hill, with critics labeling it a slush fund for Trump supporters claiming political persecution.

Brinkema’s pause order resulted from a lawsuit by former Justice Department lawyer Andrew Floyd and others. They contended that nearly $2 billion was allocated without congressional approval, incentivizing unlawful behavior and representing a significant misuse of taxpayer funds.

Legal experts have expressed significant concern over the fund’s lack of oversight and its disconnection from Trump’s IRS lawsuit claims.

Adam Zimmerman, a law professor at the University of Southern California, explained to NPR that previous mass compensation funds directed by a president, such as those for the Holocaust or the BP oil spill, resolved large-scale class-action lawsuits, which is not the case here.

“All those cases involved identifiable injuries to specific groups, for real legal violations under neutral rules, often settled within the framework of class action or mass litigation,” Zimmerman commented on Saturday.

This fund, however, “doesn’t address real legal injuries.”

“It provides money to an undefined group who never initiated any legal action,” Zimmerman noted, describing it as “unprecedented in the history of the republic.”