President Donald Trump is retreating from plans for a $1.8 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund” after a fierce backlash from congressional Republicans, according to two people granted anonymity to describe the decision.
White House officials communicated the move Monday to top Republicans on Capitol Hill, the people said.
The Justice Department, which was set to administer the fund, also indicated Monday it would “abide by the Court’s ruling” to halt progress after a federal judge in Virginia on Friday temporarily halted any payouts or other work to establish the fund. But the White House has not stated publicly yet whether it would move to make changes to the fund or kill it altogether — or seek to revive it later should Trump change his mind.
The fund has emerged as a roadblock for advancing the GOP’s immigration enforcement bill. A planned Senate vote on that bill was abandoned last month after the Justice Department announced the creation of the fund, which could be used to pay Trump allies who had been prosecuted under prior administrations — including those who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021.
Democrats pledged to force votes on amendments related to the fund, creating a serious political dilemma for congressional Republicans. A vote on the package has not yet been rescheduled.
And asked Monday about the possibility that Democrats could still force Republicans to take politically tough votes related to the fund, Senate Majority Leader John Thune told reporters: “If the administration effectively shuts it down — makes that very, very clear — then that, to me, should answer the question hopefully, at least for most Republicans.”
But he added that the administration needs to make it clear that if it drops the fund that it won’t attempt to bring it back in the future: “That would be the ideal outcome.”
The DOJ, in its statement Monday afternoon, defended the fund but was silent on its future status. A hearing on the Virginia suit is set for June 12, while several other legal challenges are pending.
The White House, when asked for comment, referred to the DOJ post on X .
An administration official, granted anonymity to speak candidly, was more cryptic: “How dead it is is what’s being worked on.”
A Senate GOP leadership aide said the Justice Department statement is an acknowledgement that there are issues with the fund and that changes need to be made.
The White House has been backchanneling with GOP leaders about the fund since its establishment in May prompted an uproar on both sides of the aisle. Thune said in an interview Monday he had been talking with the administration and Trump met with Speaker Mike Johnson earlier Monday in the Oval Office to discuss the controversial fund as part of a larger conversation about the fate of the immigration measure.
Johnson raised concerns about the viability of the fund during the meeting, noting issues foremost in the Senate as enough GOP senators balked over the fund to derail the immigration enforcement bill before the Memorial Day recess, according to one of the people and two others.
Axios first reported on Trump’s decision Monday.
Justice Department officials have emphasized that the fund was to be drawn from an existing Congressional appropriation to settle suits, legal claims and court judgments against the federal government.
The Trump DOJ previously agreed to pay ex-National Security Adviser Michael Flynn and former Trump 2016 campaign adviser Carter Page $1.25 million each to settle suits the two men filed, claiming they were unfairly targeted for criminal prosecution.
The Biden administration also paid settlements in politically-charged cases, such as the release of text messages between FBI agent Peter Strzok and FBI attorney Lisa Page.
“I already have the authority to settle any claim that is brought against the United States of America,” Associate Attorney General Stan Woodward told reporters last month.
Woodward added that the fund would have more oversight because a group of five people would rule on payments — although that would also give the Trump administration some additional distance from controversial payouts.
“I frankly think that we should be ecstatic about the idea that we’re going to inject more accountability into the process, as opposed to having just one person sign off on settlements,” DOJ’s No. 3 official said.
Alex Gangitano, Myah Ward and Kyle Cheney contributed to this report.
No comments:
Post a Comment