Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche killed the $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund to secure key Republican votes for his confirmation, narrowing a tool meant to compensate Americans who say the government targeted them unjustly.
Story Highlights
- Blanche issued a formal order rescinding the nearly $1.8 billion fund created at the Justice Department.
- Republican holdouts moved toward backing Blanche for attorney general after the rollback.
- The fund was tied to a settlement in President Donald J. Trump v. Internal Revenue Service.
- Trump has signaled he still supports compensation for victims of government “weaponization”.
Blanche Rescinds Fund After Senate Standoff
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche signed an order Sunday night canceling the Department of Justice’s anti-weaponization fund. Axios reported the move ended a procedural blockade by two Republican senators who had refused to advance his nomination while the program remained in place. The order came after weeks of meetings, letters, and public pressure around the fund’s size and scope. Blanche’s decision removes the program from the department’s books, even as debate over redress for past abuses remains active.
Reporting describes the fund as nearly $1.8 billion and born from a legal settlement related to President Trump’s litigation with the Internal Revenue Service. Blanche’s step follows earlier scrutiny on Capitol Hill about who would qualify, how claims would be vetted, and how taxpayer money would be used. The action also aimed to clear the path for a Senate vote on his nomination, which had been stalled by Republican lawmakers demanding firm written limits or a full rollback.
How The Fund Arose And What It Promised
The Department of Justice announced the Anti-Weaponization Fund in May, describing it as a process to hear and redress claims by people who suffered government “weaponization” and lawfare. The department tied the fund to a settlement in President Donald J. Trump v. Internal Revenue Service. Supporters argued the mechanism would compensate those who faced selective enforcement or politicized cases. Critics warned it would look like payouts to political allies and could bypass normal court or congressional oversight.
Coverage has varied on potential beneficiaries, with some reports noting that people tied to January 6 cases could seek relief. The department’s statement emphasized a claims process focused on alleged abuse by officials, not blanket payments. The lack of a clear statute defining an eligible class drew skepticism from lawmakers who favor targeted, legislated compensation programs. That gap helped drive the Senate resistance that Blanche ultimately had to overcome to move his nomination forward.
Republicans Shift After Written Rollback; Trump Still Backs Redress
After Blanche’s formal rescission, Republican senators who had stalled his nomination said they would advance him, citing the department’s written commitment to end the program. That shift showed where concerns rested: process, oversight, and the risk of a broad discretionary fund inside the executive branch. Lawmakers framed the change as protecting taxpayers while keeping the door open to debate future remedies through normal legislation rather than a settlement-based vehicle.
President Trump has continued to defend the idea of compensating Americans who were, in his view, wrongly targeted. He has signaled support for pursuing a legislative approach if needed, including if the Senate slow-walked or denied Blanche’s confirmation. That stance keeps the focus on a core conservative concern: ending double standards in government and holding federal power to account. The disagreement now turns on method. Congress can consider a narrower, statute-based remedy with strict rules and transparency.
Sources:
npr.org, washingtonpost.com, justice.gov, youtube.com
