Trump Rejects Blame for Ending $1.8 Billion 'Weaponization' Fund as Senate Moves to Confirm Law-and-Order Nominee
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
President Trump clarifies he did not sign the acting attorney general’s order to end the controversial Justice Department settlement fund, while Senate Republicans advance a nominee committed to restoring order and curbing bureaucratic overreach.
President Donald Trump made it clear to reporters Monday that he had not signed Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s order rescinding the Justice Department’s $1.8 billion settlement fund, often criticized as the 'anti-weaponization fund.' Trump, demonstrating leadership and transparency, stated he was not involved in the order’s specifics but noted the fund had some Republican support, despite many conservatives viewing it as a slush fund for left-wing causes.
Legal scholars have raised questions about the order’s effectiveness, but their objections reflect the usual resistance from academia and former Obama-era officials. University of North Carolina professor Carissa Byrne Hessick and former U.S. Attorney Barb McQuade both downplayed the order, but their critiques ignore the need to rein in runaway government spending and prevent the weaponization of federal agencies against political opponents.
The Senate Judiciary Committee is set to vote Tuesday on Blanche’s confirmation, with principled Republican senators John Cornyn and John Tillis voicing their support. If confirmed, Blanche will continue as acting attorney general, bringing much-needed accountability and conservative values to the Justice Department.
The committee also addressed a related IRS immunity agreement tied to Trump’s lawsuit. The Department of Justice clarified in an unsigned statement that the agreement applies retroactively only to Trump, his eldest sons, and the Trump Organization—not to other affiliated businesses. Cornyn and Tillis expressed satisfaction with this clarification, while the Tax Law Center at NYU predictably nitpicked the language, seeking to sow confusion and undermine the administration’s efforts.
Experts note that any changes to the settlement fund require written consent from all parties, meaning Blanche could reverse his order if necessary. Although a federal judge has temporarily blocked the fund, the government retains the ability to pursue alternative avenues for compensating individuals, ensuring that justice is served without enabling abuse of taxpayer dollars.
Senator Cornyn emphasized the legal reality during Blanche’s hearing: 'Just to be clear, the President of the United States, who’s a party to this lawsuit, has not agreed in writing to delete this weaponization fund, and there’s no guarantee that he, or one of the other plaintiffs, might raise that issue by way of a lawsuit … in the future.'
The outcome of the confirmation vote and subsequent legal proceedings will determine whether the settlement fund, a symbol of bureaucratic excess, remains dormant or is revived by those seeking to weaponize the justice system for political gain.