In a notice to a federal judge, the Trump administration says such a sworn declaration is “unnecessary” and a violation of separation of powers.
Trump DOJ refuses to kill ‘anti-weaponization’ fund in sworn court declaration
In a notice to a federal judge, the Trump administration says such a sworn declaration is “unnecessary†& a violation of separation of powers
MS NOW: apple.news/AnPwv1qfrTgy...
🔊hell no, capitol switchboard 202-224-3121
— CVJ (@enuffsaysv.bsky.social) 2026-06-19T19:54:52.104Z
https://www.ms.now/news/trump-doj-refuses-to-kill-anti-weaponization-fund-in-sworn-court-declaration
The Trump administration refused to formally kill its nearly $1.8 billion “anti-weaponization” fund on Friday, declining to submit a court-requested sworn declaration to a federal judge acknowledging the program is dead.
Instead, the Department of Justice continued to rely on Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s congressional testimony that the administration is not moving forward with the fund.
In a notice to the court, the DOJ wrote, “Such declarations are unnecessary and the compelled testimony of senior officials from the Executive Branch implicates serious separation of powers concerns.”
The refusal by Blanche and the DOJ to put a pledge in writing not to create the fund — aimed at compensating those who believe they were the victims of alleged prosecutorial overreach —is likely to spark political backlash, especially on Capitol Hill where Blanche’s permanent nomination to head the department is pending.
The DOJ maintains its public statements — both in Blanche’s congressional testimony and in written court filings and hearings — should be sufficient. “All these statements were made under the backdrop of serious penalties for falsity,” it writes. “So there is no reason why declarations should affect the Court’s mootness analysis.”,,,,,
At last week’s hearing in Virginia, Brinkema expressed similar misgivings about Trump’s comments and Blanche’s reluctance to put a pledge not to create the fund in writing. These misgivings will likely continue to bubble now that the DOJ has declined to submit the declaration and the litigation will likely continue.
There are at least two separate federal court cases. In addition to the Virginia case described above, there is a separate lawsuit brought by 35 retired federal judges seeking to litigate (i) whether this slush fund was a "fraud on the court" and (ii) whether there was a valid lawsuit in the first place because there was no case or controversy. trump's attorneys refused to answer the courts issues in that case. This will be fun to watch
= new reply since forum marked as read