Get all your news in one place.
100's of premium titles.
One app.
Start reading
The Guardian - US
The Guardian - US
World
Sam Levine in New York

Judge extends block on Trump’s $1.8bn ‘anti-weaponization’ fund

Donald Trump looks ahead while seated
Donald Trump in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington DC on 11 June 2026. Photograph: Kent Nishimura/AFP/Getty Images

A federal judge in Virginia has extended an order blocking the Trump administration’s nearly $1.8bn slush fund, saying the administration’s public statements that the fund was dead were not assuring enough.

The US district judge Leonie Brinkema, an appointee of Bill Clinton, said she would lift her order if the acting attorney general, Todd Blanche, and the treasury secretary, Scott Bessent, filed a declaration under penalty of perjury that the fund was not moving forward in the next week.

The fund caused immediate bipartisan outrage when it was announced last month as part of a settlement between the IRS and Donald Trump over the leak of his tax returns. Amid mounting pressure, Blanche said during a congressional hearing last week that the fund was not moving forward.

But Blanche had refused to put that promise in writing and Trump has since made public statements equivocating on whether the fund was really dead. A separate part of the agreement that gives Trump, his family and related entities immunity from IRS audits remains in place.

Brinkema had earlier issued an order blocking the fund while litigation against it was pending. That order was set to expire on Friday.

“This ruling is a significant victory for the constitution, the rule of law and people in America,” said Skye Perryman, president and CEO of Democracy Forward, which represented the plaintiffs in the suit. “The court recognized the serious legal concerns raised by the Trump-Vance administration’s attempt to create a secretive, taxpayer-funded compensation program operating outside the constitutional safeguards that govern public spending. Despite the administration’s shifting explanations about the future of the slush fund, the court’s order ensures that taxpayer dollars cannot be distributed through this unlawful scheme while the courts fully consider the serious constitutional issues at stake. We look forward to continuing this challenge on behalf of our clients.”

The plaintiffs in the case include a former federal prosecutor who worked on January 6 cases, a California professor acquitted of attacking immigration agents and the Connecticut city of New Haven, as well as the watchdog group Common Cause and the National Abortion Federation.

Sign up to read this article
Read news from 100's of titles, curated specifically for you.
Already a member? Sign in here
Related Stories
Top stories on inkl right now
One subscription that gives you access to news from hundreds of sites
Already a member? Sign in here
Our Picks
Fourteen days free
Download the app
One app. One membership.
100+ trusted global sources.