A federal judge has ordered officials to file sworn statements within a week confirming that a proposed $1.8bn compensation fund for allies of Donald Trump has been abandoned. Judge Leonie Brinkema said conflicting evidence prevented her from dismissing a lawsuit challenging the plan. She requested sworn declarations from Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and said she would declare the case moot if both statements are filed. The fund, labelled a "slush fund" by critics, was previously said to be dropped by the administration but remains blocked by the court.
Judge Demands Sworn Proof Within a Week That $1.8bn 'Jan 6' Compensation Fund Has Been Abandoned
Todd Blanche, acting Attorney General, must certify that plans for a fund that would have compensated convicted Trump supporters have been cancelled - Mandel Ngan/AFP
A federal judge has given senior officials one week to provide sworn statements confirming that a proposed $1.8bn (£1.3bn) compensation programme — widely criticised as a "slush fund" intended to benefit allies of former president Donald Trump — has been abandoned.
At a hearing in Alexandria, Virginia, on Friday, U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema said the government had not provided the binding assurances needed to dismiss a lawsuit challenging the plan. Because of conflicting evidence, she said, she lacked "the kind of absolute certainty" required to declare the case moot.
What the Court Asked For
Judge Brinkema asked for sworn declarations, signed under penalty of perjury, from Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent confirming that the administration is not moving forward with the fund. She said she would dismiss the litigation if both officials file the requested statements within a week.
Background And Controversy
The proposed programme was described by supporters as an "anti-weaponisation" measure to compensate people they say were unfairly targeted by the Department of Justice. Critics from both parties derided it as a secretive, taxpayer-funded "slush fund." Among potential beneficiaries named by proponents were some people arrested and charged following the 6 January 2021 storming of the U.S. Capitol — people whom Mr. Trump has called "incredible" and "treated so unfairly." On his first day back in office, Mr. Trump issued clemency to more than 1,500 people convicted in connection with the Capitol assault.
Last month, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche told Congress the administration would drop the plan. "We are not moving forward with the fund, period," he said. However, Judge Brinkema said that oral statements and other conflicting evidence left unresolved questions that required formal, sworn confirmation.
Legal Outcome So Far
Brinkema, who has been overseeing the lawsuit challenging the fund's creation, issued an indefinite block on the programme at the hearing. The plaintiffs, represented by Democracy Forward, argued the proposal raised serious constitutional and statutory concerns by attempting to create a taxpayer-funded compensation programme outside the usual safeguards for public spending.
Skye Perryman, president of Democracy Forward, called the ruling "a significant victory for the Constitution, the rule of law, and people in America," saying the court recognised the serious legal concerns raised by the attempt to craft a secretive compensation programme.
The court's request for sworn declarations gives the administration a narrow path to have the case dismissed, but the legal challenge will remain active unless the requested written assurances are filed and accepted by the judge.
Help us improve.
