A federal judge in Virginia has temporarily barred the government from taking steps to operate the $1.8 billion “anti-weaponisation” fund while she considers whether a longer injunction is warranted amid multiple lawsuits challenging the program.
U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema issued the order on May 29, 2026, saying the pause was necessary “to ensure that no funds are irreversibly disbursed.” The Treasury has not yet announced the five-person panel that would oversee disbursements, and Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s memo says the full amount — $1.776 billion — is scheduled to be transferred in mid‑July.
The fund was created under a settlement announced this month intended to resolve former President Donald Trump’s lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over a prior leak of his tax information. Opponents contend the arrangement functions as a politically directed compensation scheme that could benefit Trump’s allies and pardoned associates; supporters of the settlement say it fits within established precedent, including settlements from prior administrations.
Brinkema set a hearing for June 12 to consider a request filed by plaintiffs in Virginia to block officials from implementing the program while litigation proceeds. The Justice Department said it remains “extremely confident in the legality of the Anti-Weaponisation Fund” and pointed to past settlements as support for the arrangement.
Plaintiffs in the Virginia case include Andrew Floyd, a former federal prosecutor who led prosecutions related to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the U.S. Capitol. Floyd and others say the fund would provide money to people Trump pardoned or granted clemency — more than 1,500 individuals connected to the Jan. 6 cases — through a remedial process they describe as lacking sufficient structure or oversight.
Several other suits have been filed in recent weeks challenging the fund. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington asked a federal court in D.C. for an immediate temporary order to block the program; that court has not yet set a schedule. Additional complaints include a case brought by current and former law enforcement officers involved in the Jan. 6 response and a claim filed by Allison Gill, a former Veterans Affairs employee and prominent Trump critic.
Separately, litigation around the original Trump-IRS settlement has continued in Florida, where a group of former federal judges urged reopening proceedings to probe whether the agreement amounted to a “fraud on the court.”
The cases include Floyd v. Department of Justice (E.D. Va.), Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington v. Department of Justice (D.D.C.), Dunn v. Bessent (D.D.C.), and Gill v. Department of Justice (S.D. Cal.). The courts will determine whether the government may proceed with setting up and funding the panel that would manage disbursements.