The Trump administration on Tuesday backed down from its $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund after facing Republican backlash in Congress.
“We’re not moving forward with the fund, period,” said acting U.S. Attorney General Todd Blanche at a House hearing Tuesday.
Multiple Republicans balked at the fund, objecting to the possibility it could be used to pay rioters who assaulted police officers at the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
Why We Wrote This
Some Republicans were troubled by President Donald Trump’s creation of a fund to pay people who claimed the federal government was “weaponized” against them. Opposition from those lawmakers stalled one of the party’s legislative priorities. Now, immigration enforcement funding could move forward.
The administration’s decision could clear the way for Republicans to move forward with a high-priority reconciliation bill to pay for immigration enforcement. Creation of the fund, which would have used taxpayer money to pay damages to people from any political party who say the federal government was “weaponized” against them, led to a rare Republican revolt against President Donald Trump’s priorities and stalled the bill’s progress.
It remains unclear whether the White House’s promise will satisfy the senators who opposed the fund, as there was no consensus on how they wanted to see it addressed.
The fund was originally part of a deal Mr. Trump reached with the IRS that included immunity from audits on already filed tax returns for him, his family, and his businesses. During questioning Tuesday from Democrats, Mr. Blanche indicated that immunity would remain in place.
The $1.8 billion fund, however, had been the main focus of objections from some senators. Before the hearing on Tuesday afternoon, that opposition had created uncertainty about whether Republicans had the votes to move forward with a bill this week to fund Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other immigration agencies for the rest of the president’s term.
“Everything comes down to a function of math. … Because we have to have Republicans hanging together,” Senate Majority Leader John Thune of South Dakota said.
Tuesday’s discussions on Capitol Hill came days after a federal judge in one of four cases attempting to block the fund paused its advancement pending a hearing next week. On Monday, the Justice Department announced it would abide by the judge’s order.
The administration, however, did not specify whether it planned to go forward with the fund. That didn’t sit well with several Republicans.
On Tuesday, as Republican senators left their weekly caucus lunch, they gave few details on their conversations and little clue as to how the DOJ’s statement would affect progress or timing on the reconciliation bill. Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana said they had no information from the White House. Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky said he didn’t know when reconciliation could be taken up – “either this week or next week,” he said.
Kylie Cooper/Reuters
But several senators suggested Mr. Blanche’s testimony would be worth watching.
“I think his statements will be very definitive, very clear, and create the certainty that I hope all of our members and House members need,” Mr. Thune told reporters outside the Senate chamber.
The Senate majority leader must now determine whether there are enough Republican votes to pass the nearly $72 billion reconciliation bill. Democrats plan to vote in unity against it, so the defection of even a small handful of Republican senators would be enough to stymie progress.
Even if Republicans were able to move the bill forward without a provision targeting the fund, Democrats plan to put forward amendments to kill or restrict the fund in order to make Republicans vote on them. Some of the amendments could get enough Republican votes to pass.
Democrats say they want additional restrictions on the fund as part of the reconciliation bill, claiming the Trump White House cannot be taken at its word.
“Any promise from Trump is worthless,” Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer of New York said Tuesday morning. “The first amendment I will offer on the Republican reconciliation bill will be to ban Trump’s slush fund permanently and to revoke his family’s free rein to commit tax fraud forever.”
Court battles
The Justice Department created the anti-weaponization fund under highly unusual circumstances. The DOJ created the fund as part of a settlement in a lawsuit Mr. Trump filed in January against his own government – specifically the Internal Revenue Service – over the leak of his tax returns during his first term.
Rod Lamkey, Jr./AP
There doesn’t appear to be precedent for a president suing their own government, and the judge in the case had been set to probe that issue this summer.
Though Mr. Trump was bringing the case in his personal capacity, U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams of Florida wrote in an April 24 order: “He is the sitting president and his named adversaries are entities whose decisions are subject to his direction.”
“Accordingly, it is unclear to this Court whether the Parties are sufficiently adverse to each other so as to satisfy Article III’s case or controversy requirement,” she added. She later appointed three independent lawyers to help examine that question, and had ordered the parties to file briefs on the question by May 20.
Two days before that deadline, Mr. Trump informed the court that he was withdrawing the case voluntarily. Because the decision was coming so early in the litigation, the president wrote, it didn’t need to be approved by Judge Williams or by the IRS. Judge Williams then dismissed the case, though she rebuked the IRS for never filing any motions in the case, thus allowing it to be voluntarily dismissed.
Hours after the case was dismissed, the Justice Department announced a settlement agreement with Mr. Trump and his family. As part of the settlement, the agency revealed that it would establish the $1.776 billion anti-weaponization fund. The fund would be paid out by the department’s Judgment Fund – federal money set aside to pay for court judgments and settlements against the United States.
On Tuesday, Democratic Rep. Grace Meng of New York pressed Mr. Blanche as to whether the administration was prepared to put something in writing or use “another vehicle” to assure Americans that the fund was dead. Mr. Blanche simply repeated that the White House would not move forward with the fund, and said the transcript of the hearing meant it would be “in writing.”
Staff writer Henry Gass contributed to this report.