The Trump administration's plan for a specialized payout mechanism to settle claims from January 6 defendants has hit a roadblock, but a far simpler workaround already exists: a permanent government piggy bank designed to cover legal judgments against the United States.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche told Congress this week the Justice Department would not pursue the controversial $1.776 billion "anti-weaponization" fund, shelving a proposal that had drawn bipartisan criticism and faced court challenges. Yet as officials have acknowledged, the government possesses another avenue through the Judgment Fund, an existing mechanism that requires no congressional approval and operates with minimal oversight.
The Judgment Fund sits as a permanent, indefinite appropriation designed to pay settlements and judgments against the federal government without forcing agencies to request new money from Congress each time. Treasury officials describe it as a tool to "eliminate the procedural burdens involved in getting an appropriation from Congress to pay a particular judgment."
Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward signaled the administration's confidence in this path during a recent news conference, stating he already held authority "to settle any claim that is brought against the United States of America" without the new fund structure.
The retreat from the special fund came after congressional Republicans objected to its design. The measure had emerged through an unusual arrangement in which Trump agreed to drop his lawsuits against the government in exchange for its creation. Critics branded it a "slush fund" for Trump associates, and a federal judge had already blocked it temporarily before Blanche's announcement, following a lawsuit brought by a former January 6 prosecutor.
That lawsuit will proceed regardless. A judge in the Eastern District of Virginia has scheduled a June 12 hearing to determine the fund's fate, with the Justice Department required to file its current position by Friday. At least four additional legal challenges remain pending, including one from Capitol police officers wounded during the attack.
Senators from both parties have weighed in on the controversy. Democrats Cory Booker and Republican Bill Cassidy filed a joint brief arguing the fund "constitutes an end-run around Congress's institutional authority." Skye Perryman, president of Democracy Forward, the group that sued to block the fund, called the bipartisan response significant, saying the lawmakers "recognize what is at stake here."
The blocked "anti-weaponization" fund would have created a commission of five Trump-appointed members with broad discretion to distribute money to claimants. The Judgment Fund operates under the existing legal system, requiring claimants to file formal claims or pursue lawsuits through established procedures.
Trump himself remained noncommittal about the fund's status on Wednesday, saying he did not know if it was dead or merely paused, but calling it "a beautiful thing" he considered "so important."
The administration has already begun distributing payouts through existing channels. The family of Ashli Babbitt, shot during the Capitol breach, settled their lawsuit for just under $5 million. Trump associates Mike Flynn and Carter Page have received settlements. And hundreds of January 6 defendants have already retained lawyers to pursue compensation claims.
Woodward argued the scrapped fund would have added accountability by requiring five reviewers instead of one. He said the administration aimed to "correct for the weaponization that was pervasive in the last administration." Woodward stated he would not personally approve settlements involving his former clients, a list that includes Trump adviser Peter Navarro, FBI Director Kash Patel, and others who faced scrutiny during the Biden administration's investigations.
A Justice Department official with close ties to Trump told a GOP ally earlier this year that Capitol riot defendants would receive "millions" in compensation, potentially stretching into 2028. Nine January 6 participants filed suit this week seeking more than $1 million each for "injuries and losses" related to the Capitol riot.
Legal experts have long warned the Judgment Fund carries vulnerability to executive branch misuse. Paul Figley, a former Justice Department official now teaching at American University, cautioned in a 2015 law review article that the fund lacked sufficient guardrails against abuse.
Senator Lindsey Graham called for a pathway for what he termed "victims of the weaponized Biden Justice Department" to seek compensation, writing on X that it was "imperative that we allow people with meritorious weaponization claims to come forward and receive compensation." Graham emphasized the existing legal system could handle such claims without redesign.
Author Sarah Mitchell: "The administration gets its payout mechanism either way, and Congress loses its seat at the table regardless of which route they take."
Comments