The Trump arms fund case was paused after Blanche’s about-face

WASHINGTON – A federal judge on Wednesday rejected a preliminary injunction against President Donald Trump’s nearly $1.8 billion “anti-gun” fund, saying the matter was moot after acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said last week the administration was “not moving forward” with the controversial plan.

U.S. District Judge Richard Leon said during an afternoon hearing that he was “not convinced that such a live controversy exists.” Leon said he relied on Blanche’s public statements and Justice Department court filings as evidence that the fund was dead.

The legal advocacy group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW) filed the lawsuit just days after Blanche issued the May 18 order establishing the $1.776 billion fund for “victims of litigation.”

Nikhel Sus, senior counsel for CREW, argued Blanche’s June 2 case Testify to the House Budget Committee are “not a legal repeal” until the DOJ puts the fund’s repeal in writing.

“Even (Blanche’s) statement was ambiguous. … He refused to recall that resignation,” Sus said, adding that it was “highly unusual.”

“This whole case is highly unusual, to say the least,” Leon replied.

Sus also argued that Trump’s comments to reporters a day later praising the fund were “directly contradictory” to Blanche’s testimony to Congress.

“I love it,” Trump said of the fund in his first public comments after Blanche’s testimony on Capitol Hill. “I think it’s so important.”

“These words have enormous meaning,” Sus said Wednesday, noting that the president oversees the DOJ and is a plaintiff in the lawsuit against the IRS that led to the compensation fund.

Leon countered, saying Trump’s comments did not mean the fund would continue.

“Maybe he does what he does out of political interest for himself,” Leon said.

Written termination?

Andrew Block, senior counsel for the U.S. deputy attorney general, criticized CREW for arguing that Blanche “totally lied to Congress.”

“Why doesn’t he rescind the May 18 order?” Leon asked.

“I don’t know the reason why,” Block replied.

Block called CREW’s case “simply not ripe for judicial review” and rejected the group’s argument that the fund evades transparency laws and is not structured to disclose information about awards or claimants.

“No money was transferred and certainly not sent to the applicants,” Block said.

Leon asked again: “So why not resign?”

“Your honor, I don’t know. I just know what the acting attorney general said,” Block replied.

“Our pleadings are our written assurances,” he added.

After denying CREW’s request to immediately freeze the fund with his bench order, Leon said he would soon issue his ruling on the group’s request for an injunction that would freeze the fund pending further litigation.

Leon warned Block that the DOJ should keep an open mind as the case moves forward.

“Don’t play with the court,” he said.

The DOJ did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

CREW President Donald K. Sherman said in a statement following Leon’s decision: “The court is clearly committed to holding the DOJ and its attorneys to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s promise not to move forward with the fund.”

“This is an important step. Although the court did not issue another preliminary injunction today, it made clear that if the government does not follow through on its commitment to close the fund, the court will hold them accountable,” Sherman said.

The fund blocked congressional work

The case before Leon is not the only legal challenge facing the fund. A ephemeral federal judge in the Eastern District of Virginia blocked until Friday, when the government and plaintiffs appear in court. The plaintiffs also include a former Jan. 6 DOJ prosecutor who was fired last year.

The fund caused a lot of attention Complaints and intense protest by Democrats and two police officers stationed at the Capitol on January 6, 2021.

So did former officers Harry Dunn, a U.S. Capitol Police officer, and Daniel Hodges, a Washington Metropolitan Police officer sued.

The prospect that the fund could pay defendants who assaulted police on Jan. 6 also shocked Republicans. The Republican Party-led $70 billion immigration enforcement package was stalled in the Senate for over a week until Blanche testified that the administration “is not progressing“broke the traffic jam.

Ultimately the Republicans in the Senate not adopted any restrictions restricting or prohibiting the fund structure.

Trumps notice Last week, the fact that Blanche, who was his personal lawyer in 2023 and 2024, was his pick for attorney general further fueled intense scrutiny from Democrats. Trump officially nominated Blanche from Florida, Monday.

During a virtual press conference Wednesday opposing the nomination, Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., said, “Blanche’s dirty fingerprints are all over the cop thugs’ bribe fund, which may actually have been intended as a payroll for Trump’s interference in the November election so his thugs could attack the polls.”

He added that the fund “caused a lot of excitement among Republicans, and that’s why he’s going to be carrying that rock as he tries to get through confirmation.”

The fund was part of an agreement with Trump to voluntarily drop his $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS over the disclosure of his tax returns nearly seven years ago. As part of the agreement, Trump, his two sons and the Trump Organization will be spared future tax audits and other criminal prosecutions.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent was peaceful about the IRS immunity agreement at the time pressed by bipartisan members of the Senate Finance Committee on June 3.

A federal judge in the Southern District of Florida reopened the case after 35 former federal judges intervened, saying the Trump administration misled the court by not disclosing full details of the settlement. The judge will hear arguments on Friday.