The Daily Fuckup

A federal judge on June 12 extended a block on the Trump administration’s $1.776 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund, keeping the payout plan frozen while the court fight continues. U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema said the fund would remain blocked until further notice, after plaintiffs argued the government’s assurances that the program was being scrapped did not end the case. ([apnews.com](https://apnews.com/article/d8345ce8f5c7f8062b858e54c396c450?utm_source=openai))

The fund was announced by the Justice Department on May 18 as part of a settlement tied to President Donald Trump’s lawsuit over the release of his tax records. In its announcement, the department said the arrangement would create a fund for people who claim they were harmed by a weaponized government and said any money left over would revert to the federal government. ([justice.gov](https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-announces-anti-weaponization-fund?utm_source=openai))

The legal dispute began before the June 12 hearing. On May 29, Brinkema temporarily blocked the government from moving forward with the fund and set the June 12 date to hear arguments on whether that order should be extended. At the June hearing, she rejected the administration’s mootness argument and kept the block in place. ([apnews.com](https://apnews.com/article/8baaee6aa8d83f0ad2905f5f8d457dec?utm_source=openai))

The fund drew criticism because of its size, its unusual setup, and the political fight surrounding it. Some lawmakers and outside critics questioned whether the settlement structure could be used to benefit Trump allies or others who had run afoul of the law, but those concerns remained allegations and commentary, not findings by the court. The judge’s order did not decide the merits of those broader political claims; it kept the fund on hold while the litigation moves forward. ([apnews.com](https://apnews.com/article/8baaee6aa8d83f0ad2905f5f8d457dec?utm_source=openai))

For now, the administration’s payout plan remains stalled, and the court has made clear that it wants more than public assurances before letting the fund proceed. The next step belongs to the litigation, not to the White House. ([apnews.com](https://apnews.com/article/d8345ce8f5c7f8062b858e54c396c450?utm_source=openai))