ALEXANDRIA, Virginia — A federal judge has directed the U.S. Department of Justice to further clarify the status of the Trump administration's proposed Anti-Weaponization Fund, keeping legal scrutiny on the controversial initiative despite the government's repeated statements that it does not intend to move forward with the program. The order comes as litigation over the proposed fund continues in federal court, according to court filings and media reports.
U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema, who is overseeing one of the challenges in the Eastern District of Virginia, has questioned whether the administration has formally abandoned the proposed fund. The judge has said the government has not provided sufficient sworn assurances that the initiative has been permanently rescinded, despite statements from Justice Department officials that it is no longer proceeding.
The proposed fund, valued at about $1.8 billion, emerged from a settlement related to President Donald Trump's lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over the disclosure of his tax records. The plan drew legal challenges from advocacy groups and criticism from lawmakers in both parties, who argued the arrangement raised constitutional and appropriations concerns.
In previous filings, the Justice Department argued that the lawsuits should be dismissed because the controversy had become moot after Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche stated that the fund would not move forward. Government lawyers also said no money had been transferred and that the administrative steps necessary to operate the fund had not been completed.
Brinkema has nevertheless maintained that the court requires a clearer record. During earlier proceedings, she indicated that an injunction would not harm the government if officials truly intended to abandon the proposal. According to court proceedings, the judge said she was unconvinced the matter had been fully resolved without formal action ending the settlement provisions that created the fund.
The Justice Department has opposed requests for additional sworn declarations from senior officials, calling such filings "unnecessary" and arguing they raise separation-of-powers concerns. In court papers, government lawyers maintained that existing representations adequately reflect the administration's position.
The case remains pending. Brinkema's latest directive requires the Justice Department to further address whether the Anti-Weaponization Fund has been definitively abandoned, while the preliminary injunction blocking implementation of the program remains in effect. Details of any further court filings or scheduling beyond the latest order remain unclear.
