The U.S. Department of Justice stated that there was no need to provide a written commitment to abandon the $1.8 billion "anti-weaponization" fund, as senior government officials had previously made clear to Congress that the plan would not proceed.
The judge requires a sworn affidavit to be submitted.
Virginia federal judge Leonie Brinkema previously required Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to submit sworn written statements within one week confirming that the fund would not proceed. She stated that without such formal documentation, the court would not agree to dismiss the lawsuit seeking a permanent injunction against the fund.
Last week, Brinkema extended the injunction against the fund. She determined that the Department of Justice leadership's prior oral statements in court and before Congress were insufficient to resolve the controversy.
The Department of Justice stated that a written commitment is unnecessary.
In documents filed on Friday, the Department of Justice said the judge’s requirement was “unnecessary” and raised “serious separation of powers issues.”
Attorney Andrew Block of the Department of Justice wrote in the filing that the Acting Attorney General has testified before Congress that the fund “will not move forward,” and government attorneys have twice reaffirmed this position in court filings and made similar statements during public hearings.
Trump's statement intensifies court concerns
This fund was initially proposed by the Department of Justice in May as part of a settlement in Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS over the leak of tax records. The $1.8 billion fund was originally intended to compensate victims allegedly subjected to prosecutorial overreach during the Biden administration.
However, critics are concerned that these funds may be used to compensate Trump allies, including defendants or individuals who pleaded guilty in connection with the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot.
One reason the court continued to press was that, after Blanche testified before Congress, Trump subsequently expressed a desire to continue advancing the fund. This inconsistent statement became a key reason for the judge’s demand that the government submit sworn affidavits.