A federal judge in Virginia has refused to end a lawsuit challenging President Donald Trump's $1.776 billion "anti-weaponization fund," ordering the Department of Justice to respond to the case and prepare for civil discovery after prosecutors declined to provide sworn declarations that the controversial program would not proceed.
Background
The lawsuit was brought by Andrew Floyd, a former prosecutor who worked on cases related to the Jan. 6, 2021 attack on the U.S. Capitol. The fund, which the administration described as intended to compensate individuals targeted by the government, became the subject of legal scrutiny after multiple federal agencies and courts raised concerns about its purpose and implementation.
In May, U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema issued an injunction blocking payments from the fund. At a June 12 hearing, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche testified before Congress that 'we are not moving forward with the fund, period.' However, those assurances did not convince the judge to dismiss the lawsuit entirely.
"As the Court explained during the June 12 hearing, a civil suit does not necessarily become moot when the defendants agree to stop the conduct at issue in the litigation," Brinkema wrote. "Under the voluntary cessation exception to the mootness doctrine, 'a party should not be able to evade judicial review, or to defeat a judgment, by temporarily altering questionable behavior.'"
The Investigation
The DOJ was offered an opportunity to end the litigation by filing written declarations under penalty of perjury affirming that officials would not take action to create or operate the Anti-Weaponization Fund and that it would not proceed "in any manner or under any other name." Instead, prosecutors filed a Notice declining to provide such assurances.
Brinkema found this refusal "particularly concerning" given that Trump and Blanche have continued to describe the fund as "important" outside of court proceedings. The judge was also unmoved by the government's reliance on Blanche's congressional testimony, noting he "was not under oath" when he made those statements.
The judge ordered the DOJ to respond to the lawsuit by July 17 and reminded parties that she had already issued an order beginning "the standard civil discovery process." A pretrial conference is scheduled for July 8 to consider claims, defenses, settlement possibilities, and to develop a discovery plan, with the aim of completing discovery by November 13.
Key Takeaways
- The lawsuit was filed by Andrew Floyd, a former Jan. 6 prosecutor challenging the $1.776 billion anti-weaponization fund
- Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche testified before Congress on June 12 that the fund would not proceed
- Judge Brinkema found his assurances insufficient because he was 'not under oath' during congressional testimony
- The DOJ declined to provide written declarations under penalty of perjury, citing separation of powers concerns
- The judge applied the voluntary cessation exception to mootness doctrine to keep the case alive
- A pretrial conference is set for July 8; DOJ must respond by July 17
What's Next
The DOJ faces a July 17 deadline to formally respond to the lawsuit. A pretrial conference scheduled for July 8 will address claims, defenses, settlement possibilities, and establish a discovery plan aimed at completion by mid-November. The case is being closely watched as an example of judicial oversight into executive branch fund management.
"Such declarations are unnecessary and the compelled testimony of senior officials from the Executive Branch implicates serious separation of powers concerns," prosecutors argued in declining to provide sworn assurances.