The Justice Department refused Friday to provide a sworn declaration from acting Attorney General Todd Blanche confirming that President Donald Trump’s proposed anti-weaponization fund has been abandoned, arguing that a federal judge’s demand for such assurances raises separation-of-powers concerns.
In a filing submitted Friday to U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema, the DOJ said sworn statements from Blanche, Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent were unnecessary because the administration has repeatedly stated that the fund “is not going forward.”
“Such declarations are unnecessary and the compelled testimony of senior officials from the Executive Branch implicates serious separation of powers concerns,” DOJ attorneys wrote, in addition to attaching a copy of Blanche’s recent congressional testimony to the filing.
The DOJ’s submission comes one week after Brinkema, a nominee of former President Bill Clinton, indefinitely blocked the administration from creating the controversial fund and ordered the government to submit declarations under penalty of perjury by Friday verifying that it would not revive the initiative under any name.
Brinkema, who had initially blocked the plan three weeks ago, indicated that such declarations could lead to dismissal of the lawsuit challenging the fund. If the declarations were not filed, she said the case would proceed and that the government would be required to file a responsive pleading by July 17.
A DOJ spokesperson told the Washington Examiner the department has already stated twice in court filings and congressional testimony that the plan is not moving ahead.
“In essence, the judge’s demand for declarations was an attempt to require her to personally sign-off on any and all future settlements, separate and apart from the Fund, that the department may make. Judges do not get to insert themselves into the department’s routine settlement authority,” the spokesperson said.
The anti-weaponization fund was unveiled by the DOJ in May as part of a broader settlement arrangement involving Trump’s agreement to settle his lawsuit against the IRS related to the leak of his tax returns. The proposal would have directed money from the Treasury Department’s Judgment Fund to compensate people who claimed they were improperly targeted by federal investigations during the Biden administration.
The plan sparked immediate criticism from Democrats and some Republicans, who raised concerns that taxpayer money could ultimately be used to compensate Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol riot defendants and other people aligned with Trump. Despite promises from the administration that anyone could apply to be eligible for the fund, multiple lawsuits quickly followed.
The administration has since repeatedly disavowed the proposal. During a House Appropriations Committee hearing last month, Blanche testified that the fund was “not going forward, period,” a statement DOJ attorneys highlighted again in Friday’s filing.
Government lawyers argued that courts routinely rely on representations made by senior officials and attorneys without requiring sworn declarations from Cabinet-level officials. They pointed to a separate lawsuit in the District of Columbia, where a federal judge recently credited the administration’s statements that the fund would not move forward when denying emergency relief.
The DOJ further contended that requiring declarations from Blanche, Woodward, and Bessent would amount to compelled testimony from high-ranking executive officials, citing a series of appellate decisions warning against judicial demands that could interfere with executive branch functions.
“Accordingly, the Court’s demands are unnecessary,” the department wrote. “As stated multiple times, the Fund is not moving forward.”
Brinkema, however, expressed skepticism during last week’s hearing that the controversy had been fully resolved. The judge pointed to Trump’s recent public comments criticizing her decision to temporarily halt the fund and suggesting he was disappointed it was not advancing.
FEDERAL JUDGE WANTS TODD BLANCHE TO SWEAR IN WRITING ANTI-WEAPONIZATION FUND WON’T BE REVIVED
“When the president of the United States says he’s disappointed that something is not going forward,” Brinkema said at the hearing, that could indicate the proposal may “rear its head” again in the future.
But given Brinkema’s insistence last week on obtaining a sworn declaration, it is likely she may prolong the litigation in an effort to obtain clarity that the fund is indeed not planned to move forward.