\n<\/p>\n
The Trump administration is backing away from its nearly $1.8 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund after a pair of court setbacks and mounting opposition from congressional Republicans who warned the program threatened to derail other White House priorities.<\/span><\/p>\n The Justice Department confirmed Monday it would comply with a federal court order temporarily blocking the fund, while multiple reports indicated the administration is now expected to scrap the effort altogether.\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n The fund, announced last month, was intended to compensate Americans whom the administration argues were unfairly targeted by government agencies during the Biden years. Supporters pointed to January 6 defendants, pro-life activists, parents targeted by federal law enforcement, and others they say were victims of politically motivated prosecutions and investigations.<\/span><\/p>\n The $1.776 billion program originated from President Donald Trump’s lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax returns. Critics argued the settlement amounted to an improper arrangement designed to create a massive compensation fund outside the normal congressional appropriations process.<\/span><\/p>\n The proposal quickly ran into resistance from both the courts and Capitol Hill.<\/span><\/p>\n A federal judge in Virginia on Friday temporarily <\/span>blocked the government<\/span><\/a> from moving forward with the fund, preventing any money from being transferred or distributed while legal challenges continue. Judge Leonie Brinkema said the order was necessary to ensure no funds were “irreversibly disbursed” before the court could fully consider the legality of the program.<\/span><\/p>\n A separate legal challenge emerged in Florida, where U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams reopened scrutiny of the settlement that created the fund.<\/p>\n In her ruling Friday, Williams ordered the parties to address allegations of collusion and explain whether the settlement represented a legitimate adversarial agreement. <\/span><\/p>\n The legal setbacks came as frustration was boiling over among Republicans on Capitol Hill.<\/span><\/p>\n The fund sparked concerns that January 6 defendants who assaulted police officers during the Capitol riot could become eligible for compensation. Lawmakers also raised questions about the lack of transparency surrounding the program and the broad discretion granted to officials overseeing it.<\/span><\/p>\n According to reports<\/span><\/a>, Senate Republicans delivered a blunt message to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche during a closed-door meeting last month, warning that legislation central to Trump’s agenda could be jeopardized if concerns over the fund were not addressed.<\/span><\/p>\n Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-SD) <\/span>publicly expressed skepticism<\/span><\/a> Monday, saying he hoped the administration would shut the program down on its own.<\/span><\/p>\n House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) also <\/span>met with Trump<\/span><\/a> at the White House Monday as controversy surrounding the fund continued to grow.<\/span><\/p>\n The Justice Department maintained that the program was intended to compensate victims of government abuse regardless of political affiliation.<\/span><\/p>\n “The Department of Justice disagrees strongly with the decision on the Anti-Weaponization Fund,” the department <\/span>wrote in a statement Monday<\/span><\/a>. “This Fund was open to anybody who was so weaponized, targeted, or persecuted, whether they were Democrat, Republican, Conservative, Independent, or otherwise.” <\/span><\/p>\n The department added that it would nevertheless comply with the court’s order.<\/span><\/p>\n Only days earlier, the administration had aggressively defended the proposal. In May, the Justice Department <\/span>insisted<\/span><\/a> it would not allow judges to interfere with efforts to provide restitution to victims of what they characterized as government “lawfare.”<\/span><\/p>\n Now, facing legal challenges, bipartisan criticism, and growing Republican opposition, the administration appears prepared to move on from the effort rather than spend additional political capital defending it.<\/span><\/p>\n The decision leaves unresolved a central question raised by many Trump allies since the president returned to office: whether Americans who believe they were unfairly targeted by federal agencies during the Biden administration will ultimately receive compensation or other forms of restitution.<\/span><\/p>\n