A federal judge in Virginia on Friday temporarily barred Department of Justice One of three lawsuits challenging it from taking any further action to create or distribute money from its so-called anti-weapons fund.
Judge Leonie Brinkema said she would hold a hearing on June 12. US District Court in Alexandria Whether to maintain the DOJ’s injunction against the $1.8 billion fund.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanch said earlier this month he was creating that fund as part of a $10 billion settlement of a lawsuit by President Donald Trump against the Internal Revenue Service for the leak of his tax records by an IRS employee. Blanche is Trump’s former criminal defense lawyer.
Hours after Brinkema’s order, the judge overseeing a lawsuit challenging the fund in Washington, D.C., scheduled a federal court hearing for Wednesday at the request of the advocacy group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington to issue a temporary restraining order that would block the DOJ’s fund from operating while that lawsuit takes effect.
The fund is meant to compensate people who allege they were victims of the DOJ’s disregard for prosecution under the Biden administration, which he and Trump have called “the law.”
Critics have called it a “dirty fund” for Trump’s associates, including those who participated in the riot at the US Capitol on January 6, 2021.
One of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit, which asked Brinkema on Thursday for an injunction and an expedited briefing on blocking the funds, is Andrew Floyd, a former federal prosecutor who said he was fired on Jan. 6 last year for prosecuting the defendants.
U.S. President Donald Trump speaks at the White House meeting with James S. Brady looks on in the press briefing room during a press conference about the conflict in Iran.
Saul Loeb AFP | getty images
The other plaintiff is Jonathan Caravello, a university professor who said he was baselessly arrested in 2025 while protesting an immigration raid in California and the city of New Haven, which the Trump administration sued for acting as a so-called sanctuary city for immigrants.
In his order, Brinkema prevented the DOJ from “taking any further action pursuant to the creation or operation of the Anti-Weapons Fund, including the transfer of funds to the Fund, the consideration of any claims submitted to the Fund, and the distribution of any funds from the Fund.”
“It is important that the status quo be maintained until Plaintiffs’ pending motion is resolved,” Brinkema wrote in an apparent footnote to his order.
Brinkema said this was “particularly important” because the plaintiffs had alleged that DOJ attorneys were “unable to provide assurance as to how long (the status quo) will remain in place” and rejected the plaintiffs’ request that the government commit to not transferring money to the fund or processing or paying claims until at least June 19 to allow for a less brief briefing in the case.
Several Trump allies have already said they want compensation from the fund.
“The Department is extremely confident in the legality of anti-arms funding, which is supported by ample precedent, including Obama-era settlements,” a DOJ spokesperson said in a statement.
“We will not allow judges’ policy preferences to interfere with our efforts to provide compensation to victims of legal violence,” the spokesperson said.
Sky Perryman, lead attorney for the plaintiffs in the lawsuit and CEO of the group Democracy Forward, called Brinkema’s order “really a significant victory.”
“The president has no authority to create the fund, but beyond the lack of authority and the separation of powers, there are a number of constitutional problems with this fund,” Perryman said during an interview with “Chris Jansing Reports” on MS Now.
“The fund itself, the way it’s described, clearly violates the First Amendment,” he said. “It wants to punish, or it wants to give preference to some people as opposed to others. It’s a violation of the equal protection clause (of the U.S. Constitution). It’s acting very arbitrary and contrary to the law, which is another federal law that they violated under the Administrative Procedure Act.”
senate minority leader chuck schumer“Of all of Trump’s corrupt schemes, his insurrectionist slush fund is one of the most corrupt,” the D-N.Y. said in a post on X on Friday.
“This decision is an important victory – but the fight is not over yet,” Schumer wrote. “Democrats will keep fighting in the courts and Congress to make sure the $2 billion in funding for cops, criminals, and MAGA cronies never comes to light.
– CNBC Kevin Breuninger Contributed to this article.
Correction: The other plaintiff is Jonathan Caravello, a university professor who said he was baselessly arrested while protesting an immigration raid in California in 2025. An earlier version misstated the circumstances of Caravello’s arrest.