WASHINGTON, D.C. — Two police officers who helped defend the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6 are now suing to block a controversial settlement fund announced by the U.S. Department of Justice on Monday.
The “Anti-Weaponization Fund” could provide compensation to the same people the two officers were defending the Capitol from.
The Anti-Weaponization Fund is sparking backlash in Washington because it could provide taxpayer-funded compensation to Jan. 6 defendants, including those charged with assaulting law enforcement. There is no guarantee that those defendants will be eligible, but the possibility has not been ruled by the Trump Administration.
Attorneys for two police officers who helped defend the Capitol on Jan. 6 filed a federal lawsuit on Wednesday to block anyone — including Jan. 6 defendants — from receiving payouts from the new $1.7 billion fund. The fund is part of a settlement between President Donald Trump and the government over leaked tax returns during his first term.
On Monday, the DOJ announced the Anti-Weaponization Fund will go to people who claim they were targeted or unfairly investigated by the government.
During a Senate hearing on Tuesday, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche was asked point-blank if individuals who assaulted police officers on Jan. 6 would be eligible for the payouts. Blanche replied, saying, “Anybody in this country is eligible to apply if they believe they’re a victim of weaponization.”
“We don’t know any of the details of that settlement fund. The acting Attorney General Todd Blanche testified yesterday, and he gave a lot of detail, and I’ll just defer to what he said because he obviously knows a lot more about it than I do,” said House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La.
Responses to the fund itself vary among Republicans. Most Republicans want to see more details and answers to their questions.
“I have, I guess, more questions than answers about this fund, in general, as to how it would be executed, how it would be put together. I mean, I think we’re also a little scant on detail. I do think it needs congressional oversight,” said Rep. Nick Langworthy, R-N.Y.
Congressman Langworthy believes there should be some recourse if the government has been wrongly weaponized against a citizen. That being said, he wants to see clear delineations as to how the decisions are made.
“We have to have really tight scrutiny, a really high burden of proof as to how those monies are going to be distributed,” said Langworthy. “I don’t think this should be seen as some direct slush fund for one particular event. I mean, there’s obviously a lot of arguments about people that claim to be falsely imprisoned. Just because they were pardoned, doesn’t mean that they were falsely imprisoned. They were charged and convicted of crimes- and there were juries of their peers that did that. I just think that we need far more answers, and I think that there’s many of us asking our leadership to go get to the bottom of that,” Langworthy added.
Most Republicans support the idea of compensating Americans who they say have been unjustly prosecuted or investigated. However, some GOP members are drawing the line on who should be eligible, specifically referring to rioters charged with assaulting police officers on Jan. 6.
“It’s common sense. Americans swept up in the Biden regime’s lawfare agenda should be compensated for the abuses they endured, but violent offenders, especially those who assaulted police, shouldn’t be eligible,” said Rep. Jack Bregman, R-Mich.
Democrats are bashing the fund and calling the fund illegal.
“Even if Congress wanted to, which we never would, we couldn’t do it because the 14th Amendment says the United States shall not pay for any debts related to insurrection or rebellion against the union, and any such debts are null and void in the eyes of the law,” said Rep. Jamie Raskin, D-Md. “And they should let those people know that.”
“Donald Trump thinks the federal government is his personal slush fund. Nearly 2 BILLION dollars for his MAGA slush fund, a billion more for his gilded ballroom, and NOT ONE serious plan to lower costs for the families forced to pay the bill. Democrats are fighting to lower costs. Republicans are fighting to launder Trump’s corruption through the federal budget. That’s the difference,” said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., on social media.
OOn Tuesday, Vice President J.D. Vance stressed that all claims would be closely reviewed and evaluated by the DOJ on a case-by-case basis.
