The Setup: Trump's Self-Dealing Masterpiece
In May, the Justice Department announced the creation of an $1.8 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund" to compensate people who alleged they were wrongly targeted under the Biden administration. The catch? Trump would drop his $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS, plus two civil claims for $230 million related to the Russia investigation and the Mar-a-Lago search.
In other words: The federal government paid Trump to stop suing itself. With taxpayer money.
The agreement sparked immediate bipartisan outrage — not because of the idea of compensating wrongfully targeted individuals, but because a significant portion of the fund was expected to go to people charged in connection with the January 6 Capitol attack.
The Judge Who Had Questions
U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema was assigned to oversee a lawsuit challenging the fund. In a Friday hearing, she issued an injunction blocking the fund from being established.
Brinkema's frustration was evident throughout the proceeding. She repeatedly asked DOJ attorney Andrew Block why Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche — who originally established the fund — hadn't simply rescinded his order if the government was now claiming it wasn't moving forward with the fund.
\"Your honor, I don't,\" Block responded, admitting he couldn't speak for Blanche.
Brinkema said she \"couldn't believe,\" given the significance of the case, that Block wouldn't have even attempted to get an answer.
Trump's Own Words Against Himself
Brinkema pointed to statements Trump himself made during a \"Meet the Press\" interview that aired just days before the hearing: \"If it was up to me, I'd pay them the kind of money that they deserve. People have been destroyed. Lives have been destroyed.\"
The judge noted that such statements suggested Trump remained committed to the fund regardless of what DOJ lawyers were telling the court. \"When the president of the United States says he's disappointed that something is not going forward,\" Brinkema said, that would only add to evidence that the fund might \"rear its head\" in the future.
Even Weirder Details
Brinkema revealed that just that week, someone had sent an application for money from the fund directly to the court. \"We had to send it back,\" she said.
She also expressed skepticism about the legality of the entire arrangement, referencing a Florida judge's recent order questioning whether Trump's lawyers may have committed fraud on the court in establishing the fund in the first place.
At one point, Brinkema read into the record an amicus brief from Senators Cory Booker and Bill Cassidy urging her to permanently block the fund over concerns that it could compensate individuals who attacked the Capitol on January 6.
The Injunction
Brinkema gave the government one week to respond with a formal declaration, under penalty of perjury, stating that no \"Anti-Weaponization Fund\" would be established — which could clear the way to dismissing the case entirely.
Without such a declaration, the injunction stays in place, blocking the fund from operating.
The Self-Settlement Problem
The core issue here is remarkable: The President sued his own government for $10 billion. The government then agreed to pay him — through a \"compensation fund\" — to drop the lawsuit. This creates a obvious self-dealing scenario where taxpayers foot the bill for an arrangement benefiting the President.
Even if some portion of the fund went to legitimately wronged individuals, the arrangement itself looks like the government capitulating to pressure from the President in exchange for him stopping his own lawsuit against it.
Sources
ABC News: Judge Issues Injunction Blocking Administration's 'Anti-Weaponization Fund'
NBC News: Meet the Press Transcript - June 14, 2026