DOJ Anti-Weaponization Fund Faces Jan. 6 Officers' Lawsuit And First Claim As GOP Skepticism Grows
On Wednesday, May 20, 2026, multiple officers who clashed with rioters on Jan. 6 filed federal lawsuits in Washington, D.C., seeking to block the Justice Department's $1.776 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund and to reclaim any transferred money.[1]
The plaintiffs include Capitol Police Sgt. Aquilino Gonell and former D.C. officer Michael Fanone in one complaint.[1] Retired Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn and Metropolitan Police officer Daniel Hodges filed a separate suit saying the fund is unlawful and should be dissolved.[2] The officers ask judges to halt payouts, reverse transfers from the Treasury Judgment Fund and bar payments to people prosecuted for Jan. 6 violence.[1]
On Monday, May 18, 2026, the Justice Department said it would move $1.776 billion from the Treasury Judgment Fund into a new Anti-Weaponization account.[3] DOJ said a five-member board appointed by the attorney general would oversee awards and that the account would stop processing claims on December 15, 2028.[3] That announcement accompanied President Trump's voluntary dismissal of a January $10 billion lawsuit he had filed against the IRS over leaked tax returns.[4] On Tuesday, May 19, 2026, DOJ posted a one-page addendum signed by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche barring the government from examining or prosecuting Trump, his sons and affiliated entities over prior returns.[5] That addendum halted audits that IRS lawyers had modeled as potentially producing roughly $100 million in penalties.[6]
Initial coverage presented the fund as a formal process to hear and redress claims of politically motivated investigations.[7] Within days reporting shifted to legal and political objections as senators from both parties pressed Acting Attorney General Blanche about eligibility and multiple Jan. 6 officers filed suits calling the arrangement unconstitutional and a potential "slush fund." MS NOW
Meanwhile, the first known claim under the program was filed by former Trump official Michael Caputo, who sought $2.7 million even though the fund's five-member oversight board has not yet been appointed.[8] The officers' lawsuits now put the fund's legality and any pending transfers before federal judges as Congress and the courts weigh whether DOJ lawfully carved out the Judgment Fund to create a standing compensation account.[1]
Mainstream coverage frames the DOJ's creation of the Anti-Weaponization Fund as a formal process for addressing claims of political bias, but critical analyses argue that this fund represents a troubling misuse of public resources. The Wall Street Journal highlights that the fund lacks proper congressional authorization and oversight, raising constitutional concerns about its governance structure and the potential for politicized payouts. This perspective emphasizes that the fund appears to be more about resolving political grievances than addressing legitimate legal claims, a nuance not fully captured in the mainstream summary. Critics, including Rep. Jamie Raskin, have labeled the fund a 'political grievance fund,' reflecting broader skepticism about its purpose and implications for public trust in the Justice Department.
Additionally, while the summary mentions the lawsuits filed by Jan. 6 officers, it does not delve into the broader implications of these legal challenges. The critiques suggest that these lawsuits are indicative of a significant backlash against the fund, which many view as unconstitutional and a potential slush fund for politically connected individuals. The editorial board of the Wall Street Journal argues that the fund's structure invites conflicts of interest and undermines the integrity of the compensation process, a critical perspective that underscores the ongoing debate about the fund's legitimacy and the potential erosion of institutional norms.
Show source details & analysis (36 sources)
📌 Key Facts
- On Monday, May 18, 2026, the Justice Department announced creation of a $1.776 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund" funded by moving money from the Treasury Judgment Fund; the account will be overseen by a five‑member board appointed by the attorney general and will stop processing claims on December 15, 2028 (Anti-Weaponization Fund).
- On Monday, May 18, 2026, President Donald Trump filed to voluntarily dismiss his January 2026 $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service, with his filing characterizing the dismissal as "self‑executing" and paving the way for the fund‑linked settlement ( $10 billion lawsuit).
- A one‑page addendum posted on Tuesday, May 19, 2026 and signed by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche states the U.S. is "forever barred and precluded" from examining or prosecuting President Trump, his sons and affiliated entities over prior tax returns — language that halts ongoing audits tied to those returns and effectively erases a modeled roughly $100 million IRS penalty (one‑page addendum).
- On or before Wednesday, May 20, 2026, former Trump official Michael Caputo became the first known claimant to file under the new fund, submitting a request for $2.7 million (filed before the fund’s five‑member oversight board had been appointed) (Michael Caputo).
- On Wednesday, May 20, 2026, multiple Jan. 6 law‑enforcement officers — including Harry Dunn, Daniel Hodges, Aquilino Gonell and Michael Fanone — filed federal lawsuits in D.C. seeking injunctions to block the fund, to dissolve it as unlawful, and to claw back any transferred Judgment Fund money, arguing the settlement and fund bypassed Congress and could reward rioters (Jan. 6 Police Officers).
- The fund and settlement have provoked bipartisan scrutiny: Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche testified before a Senate Appropriations panel on Tuesday, May 19, 2026 and senators from both parties pressed him on eligibility (including whether pardoned Jan. 6 defendants could receive payouts) while some Senate Republicans publicly expressed unease about the fund’s legality and oversight (Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche).
📊 Analysis & Commentary (3)
Democrats, Don’t Fight Fire With Fire
"The author criticizes Democratic calls to mirror Trump's expansive use of executive power (citing figures like AOC), arguing that Democrats should instead rein in executive excesses and restore legal and institutional limits rather than 'fight fire with fire.'"
Trump’s $1.776 Billion ‘Anti-Weaponization Fund’
"The WSJ opinion piece analyzes the DOJ’s move to place $1.776 billion into an "Anti‑Weaponization Fund" tied to Trump’s IRS suit and argues the structure is constitutionally and politically problematic — effectively a poorly overseen, potentially partisan use of the Judgment Fund that sidesteps Congress and invites legal challenge."
The $1.776 Billion Deal for Trump's 'Anti-Weaponization Fund'
"The WSJ Potomac Watch episode is commenting on DOJ's creation of a $1.776 billion 'Anti‑Weaponization Fund' to settle Trump's IRS suit (the DOJ fund story), and the hosts take a critical stance, arguing the move uses public money in a politicized, opaque way that shields Trump and invites opportunistic claims while undermining DOJ impartiality."
📰 Source Timeline (36)
Follow how coverage of this story developed over time
May 20, 2026
8:21 PM
2 officers who responded to Jan. 6 riot sue over DOJ's "anti-weaponization" fund
New information:
- On Wednesday, May 20, 2026, CBS reported that two Washington, D.C. law enforcement officers who were attacked during the Jan. 6, 2021 Capitol riot filed a lawsuit to block the Justice Department's Anti-Weaponization Fund.
- The CBS segment identifies the plaintiffs specifically as officers who responded to and were assaulted during the Jan. 6 attack, adding detail to earlier references to "multiple" officers suing.
- The report reiterates that the lawsuit seeks to halt the operation of the DOJ's Anti-Weaponization Fund and frames it as a direct challenge by frontline Jan. 6 responders.
4:31 PM
Officers who defended Capitol on Jan. 6 sue to block payouts from $1.8B 'anti-weaponization' fund
New information:
- On Wednesday, May 20, 2026, Metropolitan Police officer Daniel Hodges and former U.S. Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn filed a federal lawsuit seeking to block any payouts from the $1.776 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund.
- The complaint seeks to bar January 6, 2021 rioters and all other claimants from receiving payments and asks the court to dissolve the fund entirely as an illegal 'slush fund.'
- The suit names President Donald Trump, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent as defendants and argues no statute authorizes the fund’s creation or the underlying IRS settlement structure.
- Blanche testified at a congressional hearing on Tuesday, May 19, 2026, and would not rule out fund eligibility for Jan. 6 rioters who assaulted police, a point cited in the officers’ filing.
- The officers allege the fund will 'finance the insurrectionists and paramilitary groups that commit violence' in Trump's name and claim it increases credible threats against them by encouraging further violence.
- The lawsuit describes the Anti-Weaponization Fund as 'the most brazen act of presidential corruption this century' and asserts its design violates the Constitution and federal law.
4:00 PM
Two Jan. 6 Police Officers Sue to Stop Trump’s ‘Anti-Weaponization’ Fund
New information:
- On Wednesday, May 20, 2026, former Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn and Metropolitan Police officer Daniel Hodges filed a federal lawsuit seeking to stop the Trump administration's plan to create a nearly $1.8 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund.
- Their complaint alleges the compensation program is unconstitutional and describes it as a 'slush fund to finance the insurrectionists and paramilitary groups that commit violence' in President Trump's name.
- The Wall Street Journal published and linked the filed complaint, providing the first detailed look at Dunn and Hodges's specific constitutional arguments against the fund.
3:48 PM
Jan. 6 officers sue over Trump's $1.8B fund they call a "corrupt sham"
New information:
- Axios reports on May 20, 2026, that January 6 officers filed a new federal lawsuit directly targeting President Trump's roughly $1.8 billion DOJ 'Anti-Weaponization' or 'Lawfare' fund, which they call a 'corrupt sham.'
- The article emphasizes the plaintiffs' argument that the fund was created without congressional authorization by diverting $1.776 billion from the Treasury Judgment Fund through a settlement of Trump's $10 billion IRS lawsuit.
- Axios adds political context that Trump and allies are publicly describing the program as a way to compensate victims of 'lawfare,' while critics, including the suing officers, frame it as a vehicle to reward political allies, including some January 6 defendants.
3:35 PM
Senate Republicans express uneasiness with Trump’s $1.8 billion ‘slush fund’
New information:
- On Tuesday, May 19, 2026, Senate Majority Leader John Thune said he is "not a big fan" of President Trump's roughly $1.8 billion fund and that he is unsure how it will be used.
- Sen. Jerry Moran on May 19 called the fund "a lot of money" and said he wants more information about the "legality" of creating such a fund without congressional input.
- Sen. Bill Cassidy said on May 19 he sees no "legal precedent" for the fund and warned that voters focused on making ends meet will question creating a "slush fund" lacking clear legal grounding.
- Sen. Mike Rounds raised concerns on May 19 about the absence of clear details, asking where judicial review fits in and what role Congress has in overseeing the fund.
- On May 19, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche refused to rule out paying claimants who were prosecuted and later pardoned for assaulting police during the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot, prompting Sen. Lisa Murkowski to say she would have "serious and significant problems" with that.
- Sen. Bill Hagerty endorsed the concept of the fund on May 19, saying many people "suffered severely" from what he called Biden-era weaponization of government, while insisting he has no financial interest in any payout.
- Sen. Josh Hawley told MS NOW he could "think of a lot of people who ought to be compensated" from the fund, highlighting GOP divisions over the program.
- House Democrats on the Judiciary and Ways and Means Committees have sent a letter to Trump administration officials directing them to retain all documents related to creation of the $1.776 billion fund, signaling investigative groundwork.
2:58 PM
Former official files first claim under Trump’s ‘slush fund,’ seeks $2.7 million
New information:
- On Tuesday, May 19, 2026, former Trump administration official Michael Caputo filed what outlets describe as the first known claim under the DOJ Anti-Weaponization Fund.
- Caputo’s letter to Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche seeks $2.7 million, asserting he was a target of the FBI’s 2016 Crossfire Hurricane investigation and a later 2021 probe tied to a One America News documentary about Joe Biden and Ukraine.
- The article notes the fund’s five-member oversight board has not yet been appointed, so Caputo’s claim arrives before the fund’s administrative structure is in place.
2:58 PM
Michael Caputo, former Trump official, files claim for "anti-weaponization" fund
New information:
- On or before Wednesday, May 20, 2026, former Trump ally and ex-administration official Michael Caputo filed a claim seeking money from the Justice Department's Anti-Weaponization Fund.
- CBS News identifies Caputo by name as a claimant and notes he is attempting to obtain compensation under the settlement-created program.
- The CBS segment frames Caputo’s move as part of an emerging wave of applications to the fund only days after it was established.
2:49 PM
Jan. 6 Police Officers Sue to Block Trump’s $1.8 Billion Fund
New information:
- On Wednesday, May 20, 2026, U.S. Capitol Police Sgt. Aquilino Gonell and former D.C. police officer Michael Fanone filed a federal lawsuit seeking to block the $1.776 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund and reverse any money already transferred into it.
- The complaint was filed in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia and names the United States, the Treasury Department and Treasury officials as defendants, arguing the Trump administration lacked statutory authority to create and fund the Anti-Weaponization Fund via the Treasury Judgment Fund.
- The suit alleges the May 18, 2026 settlement and fund violate the Appropriations Clause and separation-of-powers principles by bypassing Congress and effectively creating a standing pool of money that could be used to compensate January 6 defendants and other Trump allies.
- Gonell and Fanone assert standing by claiming the fund inflicts concrete harm on them by signaling federal endorsement and potential reward for political violence on January 6, which they say increases the risk of future attacks on law enforcement and chills their willingness to perform their duties.
- The officers ask the court for an injunction halting further disbursements, a declaration that the Anti-Weaponization Fund is unlawful, and an order clawing back the $1.776 billion transfer from the Treasury Judgment Fund.
- The complaint cites internal IRS modeling that had projected roughly $100 million in potential penalties related to Trump’s prior tax returns and argues the settlement extinguished that liability while conferring broad immunity from audits and prosecutions tied to those years.
2:29 PM
2 officers who clashed with rioters on January 6 sue to block DOJ "anti-weaponization" fund
New information:
- On Wednesday, May 20, 2026, U.S. Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn and Metropolitan Police Department officer Daniel Hodges filed a federal lawsuit seeking to block the DOJ 'anti-weaponization' fund.
- The CBS segment confirms Dunn and Hodges – both officers who clashed with rioters on January 6, 2021 – as the named plaintiffs in the new challenge to the fund.
- The report reiterates that the fund was created as part of a settlement between the federal government and President Donald Trump over leaked tax returns.
2:17 PM
Two officers in Jan. 6 riot sue to block DOJ "anti-weaponization" fund
New information:
- On Wednesday, May 20, 2026, retired Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn and Metropolitan Police Department officer Daniel Hodges filed a federal lawsuit in the District of Columbia seeking to block the DOJ's $1.7 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund.
- The suit asks a judge to declare the fund illegal and to reverse any transfers the Treasury Department has already made to the Justice Department to implement it.
- The complaint argues that the fund’s criteria could allow payments to Jan. 6 rioters, including Proud Boys and those convicted of violent assaults on officers who were later pardoned by President Trump, as well as to former Trump officials who sued DOJ and later settled.
- Plaintiffs contend that merely creating and funding the Anti-Weaponization Fund inflicts concrete harm by signaling that violence in support of President Trump will be rewarded, increasing physical danger to them.
- Their lawyer Brendan Ballou called the fund "stunningly, blindingly illegal" and asked the court to prohibit any further transfers to what he termed a "corrupt and illegal monstrosity."
12:56 PM
IRS barred from probing claims against Trump, his company or sons after DOJ settlement
New information:
- CBS segment on May 20, 2026, reports that a one-page addendum to the Justice Department’s settlement, signed by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, stipulates that the IRS is barred from pursuing claims against President Trump, his company, or his sons based on prior tax returns.
- The piece characterizes this Blanche addendum as part of the settlement terms resolving Trump’s lawsuit and highlights that it applies to claims arising from previously filed tax returns, rather than future filings.
- USA Today White House correspondent Joe Garrison provides on-air explanation that this language effectively stops ongoing tax examinations tied to those earlier returns.
12:20 AM
U.S. government to drop tax claims against Trump in broadening of IRS settlement
New information:
- On Tuesday, May 19, 2026, a one-page settlement addendum posted on DOJ's website states the U.S. is 'forever barred and precluded' from examining or prosecuting President Trump, his sons and the Trump Organization's current tax examinations.
- The addendum, signed by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, also bars the government from looking into Trump's 'family, affiliates and others' in those existing matters.
- DOJ told the Associated Press the settlement refers only to existing audits, not future examinations, clarifying the temporal scope of the bar.
- The AP article reports that the addendum was quietly added to DOJ's website Tuesday as a separate document from the main settlement announced Monday.
- Former IRS Commissioner Daniel Werfel is quoted saying he is unaware of any prior instance where IRS agreed in advance to permanently forgo examination of previously filed returns for a specific person or business.
May 19, 2026
11:17 PM
With Trump’s Settlement, a Possible $100 Million I.R.S. Penalty Melts Away
New information:
- The article reports that, before the May 19, 2026 addendum, IRS lawyers had calculated a potential civil penalty of roughly $100 million against Donald Trump tied to the disputed tax issues, exposure that is now effectively erased by the settlement.
- It clarifies that the addendum’s language barring future tax actions not only blocks audits but also precludes the IRS from assessing or collecting that already‑modeled penalty amount.
- The story adds granular detail on the internal IRS process, including that career IRS attorneys had advanced work on penalty calculations and were preparing potential enforcement steps when DOJ’s settlement directive cut off their ability to proceed.
11:13 PM
DOJ's Trump-IRS settlement bans IRS from taking action against Trump over old tax returns
New information:
- CBS reports on May 19, 2026, that 'the Internal Revenue Service is permanently barred from pursuing claims against President Trump or his company based on prior tax returns' under the Justice Department settlement.
- The CBS segment frames the bar on IRS action as covering both past and ongoing tax audits tied to Trump's earlier returns.
10:45 PM
News Wrap: Government to drop tax claims and audits of Trump
New information:
- On Tuesday, May 19, 2026, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said the government will drop any tax claims and audits of President Trump.
- In the same appearance, Blanche publicly defended the creation of the nearly $1.8 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund tied to resolving Trump's IRS lawsuit.
9:49 PM
DOJ bars IRS from auditing Trump’s prior tax returns in settlement order signed by Blanche
New information:
- Fox News reports that on Tuesday, May 19, 2026, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche personally signed an order implementing the Trump v. Internal Revenue Service settlement.
- The Blanche order explicitly states that the United States "releases, waives, acquits, and forever discharges" claims tied to the case and is "forever barred and precluded" from pursuing related actions against Donald Trump, his family members, or his affiliated businesses over covered returns.
- The article notes the order bars the IRS from examining "tax returns filed before the effective date" of the settlement and from pursuing pending claims involving Trump, his family or his businesses, echoing language reported by The Hill.
- Fox News describes the Anti-Weaponization Fund language as stemming from the settlement agreement's directive that the Attorney General establish funding and any other relevant requirements for the fund.
9:32 PM
DOJ's settlement with Trump bans IRS from taking action over his old tax returns
New information:
- On Tuesday, May 19, 2026, DOJ filed a one-page document signed by Attorney General Todd Blanche stating IRS and Treasury are 'FOREVER BARRED and PRECLUDED' from prosecuting or pursuing any claims arising out of Trump-related tax returns filed before the settlement took effect on Monday, May 18, 2026.
- The document says the protection covers all plaintiffs in Trump’s suit: Donald Trump, the Trump Organization, Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., and extends to claims related to alleged 'Lawfare and/or Weaponization.'
- A DOJ spokesperson told CBS the deal does not apply to future tax audits and framed the waivers as customary in settlements, saying there would be 'little point' in settling if either side could later bring additional previously available claims.
- The article confirms Trump will receive a formal government apology but no personal monetary payment, while DOJ will still establish the $1.776 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund.
- The progressive watchdog CREW labeled the agreement 'the most brazen act of self-dealing in the history of the presidency,' and DOJ officials Blanche and Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward publicly defended the structure and decision-making panel.
- A Texas flower shop owner and January 6 defendant told CBS 'all J6ers will apply for restitution,' underscoring likely claimant interest from pardoned Capitol riot participants.
8:17 PM
I.R.S. Must Drop Audits of Trump and Family
New information:
- On Tuesday, May 19, 2026, DOJ filed/posted a one-page addendum in the Trump tax-leak civil case that explicitly orders the IRS to terminate ongoing audits and criminal tax investigations involving Trump, his sons, and the Trump Organization that relate to the leaked returns.
- The addendum is worded so that it also restricts the IRS from opening new examinations or prosecutions based on the same leaked tax-return data, effectively creating a forward‑looking bar tied to that universe of information.
- The article details internal IRS reaction, reporting that career tax officials and some agency lawyers privately raised concerns that DOJ had bound IRS discretion in an unprecedented way and that they were not consulted before the directive was finalized.
- The New York Times reports the addendum was negotiated directly between Trump’s personal legal team and senior DOJ officials as part of resolving his $10 billion suit over leaked returns, with the tax‑enforcement language added late in the talks.
- The story adds that some members of Congress and outside tax-law experts are now discussing whether separate legislation or oversight hearings are needed to clarify that the executive branch cannot bargain away federal tax-enforcement authority in settlement agreements benefiting a sitting president.
8:01 PM
Blanche faces senators on new Trump 'weaponization' fund, Epstein, budget cuts
New information:
- On Tuesday, May 19, 2026, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche appeared before a Senate Appropriations subcommittee for his first testimony since taking office, answering bipartisan questions about the Anti-Weaponization Fund as part of President Trump's 2027 DOJ budget request.
- Blanche testified that the Anti-Weaponization Fund will be overseen by a five-person commission, with four commissioners appointed by the attorney general and a fifth chosen in consultation with congressional leadership.
- He said the commission will create guidelines, collect information, and decide whether claimants were victims of 'weaponization,' and can issue anything from formal apologies to monetary compensation.
- Blanche told senators that some information about claims, including the basis of complaints and award amounts, will be publicly reported, though he did not specify the full scope of disclosures.
- Multiple senators, including Jeff Merkley, pressed Blanche to ensure that people convicted of violent crimes such as assaults on Capitol Police during January 6 are excluded from eligibility; Blanche declined to state a position but said he would 'definitely encourage' commissioners to consider such issues when setting guidelines.
- Sen. Patty Murray characterized the Anti-Weaponization Fund during the May 19 hearing as 'corruption that has never been more blatant,' and Sen. Chris Van Hollen accused Blanche of acting 'like the president's personal attorney.'
- Subcommittee members also questioned proposed cuts in Trump's 2027 DOJ budget request to programs that support victims of gender-based violence, though specific line items were not detailed in the excerpt.
7:48 PM
Trump's $1.7+ billion fund sparks rush to capitalize: "All J6ers will apply"
New information:
- On Monday, May 18, 2026, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche signed a memo directing Treasury to transfer $1.776 billion into the Anti-Weaponization Fund within 60 days and outlining a five-member commission appointed by the attorney general to oversee awards through December 2028.
- The settlement language sets only loose eligibility criteria, instructing the commission to consider the 'totality of the circumstances' and factors such as applicants' legal and prison costs, with specifics still to be determined.
- Multiple Republican-aligned lawyers and publicists, including Karin Sweigart, Dan Backer, Juda Engelmayer and Joseph McBride, say they are already fielding inquiries and holding conversations about submitting claims to the fund.
- Jenny Cudd, a Jan. 6 misdemeanor defendant pardoned by Trump, told CBS that 'all J6ers will apply for restitution' and said news of the fund is circulating widely among January 6 defendants via Twitter and group chats.
- The article notes earlier Trump DOJ settlements totaling more than $2.3 million with Mark Houck and Michael Flynn as examples that, critics say, suggest the fund may be used to compensate Trump allies and supporters.
7:42 PM
Trump’s ‘slush fund’ deal came with some newly disclosed fine print about his tax returns
New information:
- The MS NOW piece reiterates that a one-page DOJ addendum, signed by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and posted on Tuesday, May 19, 2026, states the IRS is "forever barred and precluded" from pursuing examinations of Trump, "related or affiliated individuals," and related trusts and businesses for tax returns filed before the settlement's effective date (Monday, May 18, 2026).
- The article emphasizes that Blanche, who signed the May 19 addendum, did not sign the original nine-page settlement agreement released Monday, underscoring that the protection for Trump’s tax returns was added in a separate step after Blanche’s May 19 Senate Appropriations Committee appearance.
- It highlights New York Times reporting that losing an ongoing IRS audit could cost Trump more than $100 million, and notes that the statutory bar on White House interference with IRS audits includes an apparent carve-out for the attorney general, which DOJ is now invoking.
7:19 PM
U.S. government agrees to drop tax claims against Trump in broadening of IRS lawsuit settlement
New information:
- On Tuesday, May 19, 2026, a one-page DOJ settlement document posted online states the U.S. is "forever barred and precluded" from examining or prosecuting President Trump, his sons, and the Trump Organization over their current tax issues.
- The AP report characterizes this language as meaning the U.S. government will permanently drop tax claims connected to Trump as part of the broader IRS leak-lawsuit settlement.
- The article reiterates that under a separate settlement agreement, Trump will receive a formal apology but "will not receive any monetary payment or damages of any kind" from the Anti-Weaponization Fund settlement.
- It restates that the administration announced the $1.776 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund" on Monday, May 18, 2026, to compensate people who say they were politically targeted by federal investigations, with applications framed as a process for "victims of lawfare and weaponization".
6:46 PM
Deal on Compensation Fund Blocks I.R.S. Audits of Trump and His Family
New information:
- On Tuesday, May 19, 2026, DOJ quietly posted a one-page document, signed by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, expanding the Trump IRS lawsuit settlement to bar the IRS from pursuing currently pending tax matters involving Donald Trump, his family, or his businesses.
- The new provision commits DOJ and IRS not to pursue any currently pending matters involving Trump's tax returns or related issues, going beyond what was in the nine-page settlement document released Monday.
- Treasury's top lawyer, General Counsel Brian Morrissey, resigned on Monday, May 18, 2026, after DOJ announced the settlement with Trump.
- The New York Times previously reported that negotiations included a measure to have IRS drop audits of Trump, his relatives and businesses, but that language was not in the Monday agreement; the May 19 addendum now implements that protection.
- The article reiterates that IRS procedures call for mandatory annual audits of the president's returns and notes that federal law generally bars the president, vice president and other executive officers from ordering specific audits to start or stop, but includes an apparent carveout for action by the attorney general.
- Prior Times reporting estimated that an adverse outcome in an IRS audit could cost Trump more than $100 million, underscoring the financial significance of the new no-audit commitment.
5:37 PM
WATCH: Dem senator snaps after Acting AG Blanche accuses him of 'obviously lying' in heated exchange
New information:
- On Tuesday, May 19, 2026, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche testified before the Senate Appropriations Committee about the fiscal 2027 DOJ budget and the new $1.776 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund.
- Sen. Chris Van Hollen pressed Blanche over the possibility that pardoned Jan. 6 defendants, including Andrew Paul Johnson, could receive money from the fund and called it a 'slush fund' for Trump allies.
- Van Hollen cited a Florida affidavit stating Johnson told a victim in a Discord message that he was being awarded $10,000,000 as a 'Jan 6'er' and offered to share money with the victim via his will.
- Blanche responded that Van Hollen was 'obviously lying' because Johnson's promises predated the fund's creation, prompting Van Hollen to warn Blanche, 'Don't ever do that again' and restate he was quoting the affidavit.
- The article reiterates that Ed Martin, now DOJ pardon attorney, is the only known Trump official to explicitly call for restitution for Jan. 6 defendants under the broader anti-'lawfare' push.
11:33 AM
California mosque shooting leaves 5 dead. And, judge dismisses Trump's IRS lawsuit
New information:
- NPR reports that on Monday, May 18, 2026, a federal judge formally dismissed President Trump's $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS after Trump requested dismissal as part of a settlement.
- The article characterizes the case as the first known instance of a sitting president suing the government he heads, underscoring its constitutional novelty.
- NPR describes the 'anti-weaponization fund' as a roughly $1.7 billion taxpayer-funded pool (rounded figure) and notes that Trump will be able to fire members of the oversight board appointed by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche.
- The report raises uncertainty about whether the government will publicly disclose who receives money from the fund and notes watchdog concerns that January 6, 2021 rioters might be eligible for compensation, although this has not been confirmed.
- Former DOJ official Rupa Bhattacharyya is quoted criticizing the settlement as an abuse of taxpayer money and highlighting that the Trump administration previously opposed similar third-party settlement structures it is now using.
May 18, 2026
10:55 PM
DOJ creates $1.8 billion fund that could compensate 'targeted' Trump allies
New information:
- On Monday, May 18, 2026, the Justice Department publicly framed the nearly $1.8 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund as a vehicle that could compensate Trump supporters who say they were wrongly investigated or prosecuted by prior administrations.
- PBS described intended beneficiaries as 'Trump supporters' who allege they were 'targeted,' adding that DOJ linked the fund rollout directly to settlement of Trump’s $10 billion IRS leak lawsuit.
- The PBS segment confirms the timing connection: the fund’s creation was announced contemporaneously with Trump’s agreement to drop the 2019 tax-returns leak suit.
10:49 PM
Who could benefit from Trump's $1.7+ billion "weaponization" fund?
New information:
- On Monday, May 18, 2026, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said the $1.776 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund is intended to provide a process to hear and redress claims from people who say they suffered government 'weaponization' or 'lawfare'.
- A DOJ memorandum signed by Blanche directs Treasury to transfer $1.776 billion within 60 days into an account for the sole use of the Anti-Weaponization Fund and confirms the fund will stop processing claims on December 15, 2028, after which unused money reverts to the federal government.
- The fund will be run by a five-member commission appointed by the attorney general, with one member chosen in consultation with congressional leadership; commissioners can be removed, but replacements must be chosen by the same method.
- DOJ says there are no partisan requirements to file a claim and that the United States has no liability if funds are misused by claimants, but has not clearly defined eligibility standards or how claims will be evaluated.
- CBS reports that Jan. 6 defendants whom Trump has pardoned, as well as former Trump officials and allies who have settled or litigated claims over prior DOJ investigations, would likely be able to apply for money, though this has not been formally confirmed by DOJ.
- CBS notes prior settlements such as a reported $1.1 million Justice Department payment to anti-abortion activist Mark Houck earlier in the year as examples of the kind of 'weaponization' claims the department has already been resolving outside the new fund.
6:57 PM
Apologies and cash headed to alleged ‘weaponization’ victims in billion-dollar Trump settlement
New information:
- Article confirms the Anti-Weaponization Fund is explicitly structured as a settlement mechanism for Trump’s January 2026 $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS, resolving that case.
- DOJ states that President Trump and his sons Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. are ineligible to receive financial compensation from the $1.776 billion fund but will receive a formal apology.
- As part of the settlement, Trump agreed to withdraw two additional damages claims: one tied to the FBI search of Mar-a-Lago and another related to alleged misconduct in the 2016 Russia-interference investigation.
- The fund is described as creating a formal, voluntary process for Americans who allege they were targets of politically motivated "lawfare" by DOJ under prior administrations, with authority to provide apologies and financial compensation.
- A five-member commission appointed by the U.S. attorney general will oversee the fund, with one commissioner chosen in consultation with congressional leadership and commissioners removable by the president, subject to replacement via the same selection process.
- The fund is expected to end on December 15, 2028, roughly one month before the end of President Trump’s second term, with remaining money to be handled after the fund ceases operations (details not fully specified in the article).
- DOJ says the fund will be financed from a permanent congressional appropriation that allows the department to pay legal settlements, rather than through a new, separate appropriation.
- Former FBI Director James Comey, who faces a separate DOJ prosecution over an alleged threat against Trump, publicly criticized the fund in an ABC News interview, calling it akin to "a multi-million-dollar ATM at Mar-a-Lago" and warning that it would reward people who have committed crimes.
6:45 PM
Trump’s ‘Anti-Weaponization’ Fund, Explained
New information:
- On Monday, May 18, 2026, the Justice Department said it will move $1.776 billion from the congressionally created Judgment Fund into a separate 'anti-weaponization' account to resolve Trump's IRS case.
- The fund will be overseen by a five-member board appointed by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, with one member selected with input from congressional leaders; President Trump can fire commissioners at will.
- Once money is in the new account, the board may use it for per diems, administrative services, staff, facilities, travel and other support, with few constraints specified in DOJ’s terms.
- The fund is intended for 'victims of lawfare and weaponization' allegedly targeted for political, personal or ideological reasons, and it will remain in existence until Dec. 15, 2028, after which any remaining balance reverts to the federal government.
- A lawyer representing about 430 Jan. 6 defendants publicly welcomed the fund’s creation and said he would seek compensation for his clients.
- The article explains that the Judgment Fund is an effectively unlimited settlement account Congress created, and experts note its loose controls have enabled the administration to use it to launch this new program without additional congressional approval.
- Judge Kathleen M. Williams had ordered briefs by Wednesday, May 20, 2026, on whether Trump’s IRS suit posed a real controversy or self-dealing, and creating the fund allowed Trump to drop the case before she ruled.
6:22 PM
Justice Dept. Announces $1.8 Billion Fund in Settling I.R.S. Suit
New information:
- On Monday, May 18, 2026, the Justice Department said it would transfer approximately $1.776 billion from the Treasury Judgment Fund into a new account labeled by officials as an 'Anti-Weaponization Fund' to resolve President Donald Trump's IRS lawsuit.
- DOJ documents reviewed by the New York Times state the fund will be overseen by a five‑member board appointed by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, with one member selected in consultation with congressional leaders.
- The DOJ paperwork specifies that the board may use the fund's money for per diems, staff, travel and other administrative costs and that the account will remain in existence until December 15, 2028, after which any remaining money reverts to the Treasury.
- Trump's May 18 federal court filing in Florida characterizes the case's dismissal as 'self‑executing,' arguing that no judicial order is required to effectuate the resolution.
- Ninety‑three House Democrats have moved to intervene in the Florida case, asserting that the settlement structure could improperly benefit Trump and his allies and seeking to challenge the payout arrangement.
- Background in the New York Times account underscores that the federal government's Judgment Fund normally pays court judgments and settlements and that carving out a dedicated $1.776 billion account of this magnitude is highly atypical.
4:30 PM
Justice Department announces a $1.7 billion 'Anti-Weaponization Fund' fund to compensate Trump allies
New information:
- On Monday, May 18, 2026, the Justice Department formally announced creation of a $1.7 billion 'Anti-Weaponization Fund' to compensate Trump allies who claim they were 'mistreated' by the Biden-era DOJ.
- The Anti-Weaponization Fund is explicitly tied to resolving President Donald Trump's lawsuit against the IRS over leaks of his tax returns and was rolled out the same day Trump's lawyers filed to dismiss the case in federal court in Florida.
- Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche described the fund as 'a lawful process for victims of lawfare and weaponization to be heard and seek redress' in a public statement.
- Rep. Jamie Raskin, top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, issued a detailed statement labeling the fund a 'racket' and 'huge slush fund for Trump' and vowed that Democrats would fight the arrangement.
- The DOJ-announced fund is structured in a way Trump's lawyers suggest will not be reviewable by a judge, though 93 members of Congress have already filed a brief aiming to challenge the resolution.
- The article underscores that the fund could channel taxpayer money to previously investigated, charged or convicted Trump supporters, including some tied to the January 6, 2021 Capitol riot, continuing a pattern of rewards to allies.
2:58 PM
Trump drops IRS lawsuit, paving the way for a settlement
New information:
- On Monday, May 18, 2026, NPR reported that President Trump is moving to dismiss his $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS in a court filing, describing the step as paving the way for a settlement.
- NPR emphasizes that legal experts view Trump's underlying damages claim as weak because the tax leaks were attributed to a federal contractor rather than a full-time government employee, and because the leaks occurred between 2018 and 2020, raising statute-of-limitations concerns.
- The article quotes U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams’ prior written doubts about whether Trump and the defendant agencies are sufficiently adverse under Article III, citing his own public remarks that he is effectively negotiating with himself.
- NPR adds expert commentary from former DOJ lawyer Rupa Bhattacharyya noting that even in very serious federal injury cases, payouts almost never exceed about $10 million, making Trump’s $10 billion demand an extreme outlier.
- Conservative legal commentator Edward Whelan is quoted calling the situation a "glaring conflict of interest" and saying it would make sense to pause the litigation until Trump leaves office so that people who answer to him are not deciding how the government responds to his claims.
2:13 PM
Trump settles $10 billion lawsuit against IRS over leak of his tax returns
New information:
- On Monday, May 18, 2026, court documents in Miami federal court state that President Trump and the Justice Department have reached a settlement in his $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS and Treasury.
- The new filing formally moves to dismiss the case and characterizes the dismissal as “self-executing,” arguing that no judicial order or analysis from U.S. District Judge Kathleen M. Williams is required.
- Judge Williams had previously ordered a hearing and questioned whether a sitting president suing executive-branch agencies he oversees met Article III’s case-or-controversy requirement.
- The article notes that ABC News previously reported the lawsuit would be dropped in exchange for creation of a more than $1.7 billion compensation fund for Trump allies, but CBS states it has not independently confirmed the amount or the fund’s creation.
- On the same day, 93 Democratic members of Congress filed a motion to intervene, arguing that any settlement could improperly direct billions in taxpayer funds to Trump, his family, and allies.
- The piece confirms the original January 2026 filing alleged that IRS and Treasury mishandled tax returns for Trump, his sons, and the Trump Organization, enabling their improper disclosure to media outlets in 2020.
1:47 PM
Trump moves to dismiss $10 billion suit over leak of tax returns after reports of a resolution
New information:
- On Monday, May 18, 2026, President Donald Trump filed a motion in federal court in Florida to withdraw his $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax returns.
- The article reiterates ABC News reporting that Trump was prepared to drop the suit as part of a deal to create a $1.7 billion fund to compensate some Trump allies who say they were wrongly investigated or prosecuted, though the court filing itself does not mention any deal terms.
- Rep. Jamie Raskin, the top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee, called the contemplated compensation fund "unconstitutional" and described it on ABC's "This Week" as a "political grievance fund" that Trump could use to "pay off his friends."
- The piece notes that Trump's current Justice Department has been pursuing his retribution agenda, including criminal cases against some perceived adversaries and a broad investigation into an alleged years-long conspiracy by law enforcement and intelligence officials, though no charges have been brought in that investigation yet.
1:37 PM
Trump moves to withdraw $10 billion lawsuit against IRS amid reports of new ‘slush fund’
New information:
- On Monday, May 18, 2026, a court filing made official that Trump, his family business and two of his adult sons are voluntarily dismissing their $10 billion civil suit against the IRS.
- The article recounts Trump's earlier public statement that he assumed "nobody would care" if he received a large government payment because he and his team were "thinking about doing something for charity."
- It reiterates prior multi-outlet reporting that Trump has envisioned a $1.7 billion fund for people he claims were harmed by Biden-era "weaponization" of the legal system, which critics label a poorly overseen "slush fund."
- The piece notes it remains unclear whether, or to what extent, that reported fund was part of the decision to withdraw the civil suit as of May 18, 2026.