The Trump administration is expected to seek other avenues for people claiming harm from weaponized justice after acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said the proposed anti-weaponization fund would not proceed.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
The Trump administration is expected to continue exploring ways to compensate people who say they were harmed by weaponized justice after acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said President Donald Trump’s proposed $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund would “not be moving forward.”
The fund, which was created as part of a settlement involving the Department of Justice, Trump, his family and the Trump Organization, now appears stalled, though questions remain over whether the administration has formally ended it. Blanche said the fund was over, “period,” but has not put that commitment in writing or withdrawn the memo that established it.
Trump also left the matter unresolved last week, saying he would have his lawyers review it.
Even with the fund apparently halted, the administration will continue to find ways to compensate people who claim they were targeted through political misuse of the justice system.
Sen. Lindsey Graham said in a post on X that existing law already gives claimants a path to seek compensation from the federal government.
“We have a legal system already in place for people to make claims against the government. That does not need to be reinvented,” Graham said.
Graham encouraged would-be claimants to use the Federal Tort Claims Act, known as the FTCA.
According to The Hill, some Jan. 6 defendants are now looking at the FTCA as a possible way to pursue compensation from the federal government. The law allows people to file claims over certain alleged wrongful actions by federal employees or agencies.
The Hill explained, “Under the FTCA, would-be claimants have two years after the date of an incident to file a claim. If the federal government denies it or doesn’t act within six months, they can bring the case in court. If the government quickly moves to settle, the payouts could be agreed to without any judicial scrutiny.”
Michael Caputo, a former Health and Human Services spokesman during Trump’s first administration, was among the first people to seek compensation through the anti-weaponization fund. Caputo told The Hill that the fund’s apparent collapse would not end his effort to obtain restitution.
“The anti-weaponization fund was a pleasant surprise, but the Republicans in the Senate — who decided that my family did not deserve restitution—will not stop me,” Caputo said.
Caputo said he is now considering an FTCA claim and described the end of the anti-weaponization fund as “a brief distraction.”
“It’s not just a beginning for me, it’s a beginning for everybody whose life was destroyed by political weaponization,” he said.
The issue has already drawn opposition from Democratic lawmakers, who are looking at ways to prevent Jan. 6 defendants from using the FTCA and the Judgment Fund to obtain compensation.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal said Congress should place limits on who can collect payments through the Judgment Fund.
“We ought to prohibit convicted criminals, particularly Jan. 6 rioters, from collecting through the Judgment Fund, because this Justice Department is so corrupt, it might somehow settle sham lawsuits, so there need to be stricter guardrails for the Judgment Fund,” Blumenthal said.
Blumenthal also called the anti-weaponization proposal “a slush fund that shouldn’t exist at all.”
The debate now moves from the failed fund to existing legal channels. Supporters of compensation efforts say people who were harmed by politically driven investigations or prosecutions should have a way to recover damages. Opponents warn that settlements could be used to send taxpayer money to Jan. 6 defendants or other politically favored claimants without enough oversight.
Although the Senate did not block the anti-weaponization fund last Thursday, Blanche’s statement signaled that the Justice Department does not plan to move forward with it. Unless the administration revives the fund or formally withdraws it, claimants such as Caputo and some Jan. 6 defendants may turn instead to the FTCA as the next front in the fight over restitution.
Original article
Comments