Judge Orders Trump Administration To Name Architects Of $1.8 Billion 'Anti Weaponisation Fund'

A US federal judge has directed the Trump administration to disclose who came up with the controversial $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization fund”, even tough Attorney General Todd Blanche’s said that it is now "dead", NBC reported.

US Magistrate Judge Ivan D. Davis of the Eastern District of Virginia on Friday partly granted a motion seeking discovery from the federal government. The order requires the administration to identify the people involved in developing the fund’s structure, a person present in the courtroom told NBC. The New York Times first reported details of the order.

Court Order Opens Fund To Scrutiny

The ruling allows the plaintiffs to seek further information about how the proposed fund came into being.

“Today’s order granting discovery is a significant step in getting to the bottom of the slush fund,” Aman George, senior counsel at Democracy Forward, said in a statement. The non-profit organisation is representing the plaintiffs challenging the proposal.

“We will continue to meet the government in court until our investigation is complete and the slush fund is permanently halted,” George added.

The US Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment on Friday evening.

What Was The ‘Anti-Weaponization Fund’?

The fund emerged from a settlement agreement involving President Donald Trump, two of his sons, the Trump Organisation and the Internal Revenue Service.

Under the proposed arrangement, nearly $1.8 billion in taxpayer funds would have been reserved for payments to people who claimed that they “suffered weaponization and lawfare” from the government .

Critcis argued that this could January 6 Capitol riot's participants. who were pardoned by Trump, eligible for compensation.

The settlement also sought to protect Trump and several members of his family from future IRS audits, another provision challenged by the plaintiffs.

Why Was The Fund Blocked?

A federal judge temporarily halted the arrangement in May after a dismissed January 6 prosecutor and a law professor previously sued by the Trump administration filed a legal challenge. Career IRS employees subsequently joined the case.

The proposal also attracted criticism from both Republicans and Democrats in Washington and threatened to complicate Blanche’s nomination as attorney general.

Blanche later issued a written declaration saying the fund “is rescinded” and that “there is no fund”.

That declaration, however, did not carry the signatures of the other parties to the original settlement. The plaintiffs argue that its absence leaves open the possibility that the compensation mechanism and the accompanying protection from IRS audits could be restored later.

The court’s discovery order now gives them an opportunity to examine who created the plan and whether it has been conclusively abandoned.

Trump Has Not Rejected Payouts

Trump has also stopped short of disavowing the fund’s underlying purpose or ruling out compensation for January 6 defendants.

During a Cabinet meeting this summer, the president said the fund “is dead, but you know, I wish it weren’t”. He added that he believed “people were horribly treated”.

Those remarks have added to questions about whether the proposal could return in a different form, despite Blanche’s written declaration.

January 6 Defendant Seeks $1 Million

The controversy resurfaced this week when Treniss Evans III, a January 6 defendant seeking $1 million from the federal government, posted a photograph of himself inside Blanche’s office.

A person familiar with the episode said Evans did not meet the attorney general.

Evans had earlier been sentenced to 20 days in prison and three years of probation for his role in the storming of the US Capitol.