A federal judge denied a temporary restraining order Wednesday on President Donald Trump’s nearly $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund, saying the issue is moot after acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said last week the administration is “not moving forward” with the controversial plan.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon said during an afternoon hearing he’s “not persuaded that such a live controversy exists.” Leon said he was relying on Blanche’s public statements and DOJ’s court filings as proof the fund is dead.

Image

The legal advocacy group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, or CREW, brought the lawsuit just days after Blanche issued the May 18 order to establish the fund, in the amount of $1.776 billion, for “victims of lawfare.”

Nikhel Sus, senior counsel for CREW, argued Blanche’s June 2 statements to the House Appropriations Committee are “not a legally valid rescission” until the DOJ puts in writing the fund is canceled.

“Even (Blanche’s) testimony was equivocal. … He refused to memorialize that rescission,” Sus said, adding it was “highly unusual.”

“This whole case is highly unusual, to say the least,” Leon responded.

Sus also argued Trump’s comments to reporters a day later praising the fund “directly contradicted” Blanche’s statement to Congress.

“I love it,” Trump said of the fund in his first public remarks after Blanche’s Capitol Hill testimony. “I think it’s so important.”

“These words carry immense significance,” Sus said Wednesday, noting the president oversees the DOJ and is plaintiff in the lawsuit against the IRS that resulted in the settlement fund.

Leon pressed back, saying that Trump’s comments do not mean the fund is going forward.

“He might be doing what he’s doing for political benefit to himself,” Leon said.

Termination in writing?

Andrew Block, senior counsel to the U.S. associate attorney general, criticized CREW for arguing that Blanche was “outright lying to Congress.”

“Why doesn’t he rescind the May 18 order?” Leon asked.

“I don’t know the reason for that,” Block responded.

Block panned CREW’s case as “simply not ripe for judicial review,” and dismissed the group’s argument that the fund evades transparency laws and is not structured to reveal information on awards or claimants.

“No money has been transferred and certainly no money has been sent out to claimants,” Block said.

Again, Leon asked: “So why not rescind it?”

“Your honor, I don’t know. All I know is what the acting attorney general said,” Block replied.

“Our briefs are our assurances in writing,” he added.

Upon his bench order denying CREW’s motion to immediately block the fund, Leon said he would soon issue his ruling on the group’s request for a preliminary injunction, which would block the fund during further litigation.

Leon warned Block that the DOJ should be forthcoming as the case proceeds.

“Don’t play possum with the court,” he said.

The DOJ did not immediately reply to a request for comment.

CREW President Donald K. Sherman said in a statement following Leon’s decision that “the court clearly committed to hold the DOJ and its attorneys to acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s promise that the fund is not moving forward.”

“This is an important step. Although the court did not grant another temporary restraining order today, it made clear that if the government goes back on its commitment to shut down the fund that the court will hold it accountable,” Sherman said.

Fund jammed congressional work

The case before Leon is not the only legal challenge to the fund. A federal judge in the Eastern District of Virginia temporarily blocked the fund until Friday when the government and plaintiffs will appear in court. A former DOJ January 6 prosecutor who was fired last year is among the plaintiffs.

The fund sparked multiple lawsuits and intense protest from Democrats and two police officers who deployed to the Capitol on January 6, 2021.

The former officers, U.S. Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn and Washington Metropolitan Police officer Daniel Hodges, also sued.

The prospect that the fund could pay January 6 defendants who assaulted police roiled Republicans as well. The GOP-led $70 billion immigration enforcement package was stalled in the Senate for over a week until Blanche’s testimony that the administration was “not moving forward” broke the logjam.

Ultimately, Senate Republicans did not adopt any restrictions to limit or ban the fund structure.

Trump’s announcement last week that Blanche, who was his personal attorney in 2023 and 2024, was his pick for attorney general has further fueled intense scrutiny from Democrats. Trump formally nominated Blanche, of Florida, Monday.

During a virtual press conference Wednesday opposing the nomination, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., said “Blanche’s dirty fingerprints (are) all over the cop beaters slush fund, which may actually have been intended as a payroll account for Trump’s November election interference for his thugs to go hit the polling places.”

He added the fund “landed with a huge thud among Republicans, and so he’s going to carry that stone as he tries to move through confirmation.”

The fund was part of a deal for Trump to voluntarily drop his $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS for the leak of his tax returns nearly seven years ago. As part of the settlement, Trump, his two sons and the Trump Organization will be immune from tax audits and other criminal prosecution going forward.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent was mum about the IRS immunity deal when pressed by bipartisan members of the Senate Finance Committee on June 3.

A federal judge in the Southern District of Florida reopened the case after 35 former federal judges intervened, arguing the Trump administration deceived the court by not sharing all details of the settlement. The judge will hear arguments Friday.