Capitol Cops Sue to Halt Trump's $1.77B Payout Fund
Two police officers who defended the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, have filed a lawsuit to block the Trump administration from creating a $1.776 billion compensation fund. The officers argue the initiative could funnel taxpayer dollars directly to the rioters who attacked them.
A Brazen Act of Corruption
Officers Harry Dunn and Daniel Hodges filed the suit in federal court in Washington on Wednesday, calling the proposal the most brazen act of presidential corruption this century. They argue the taxpayer-funded mechanism is designed to finance insurrectionists and paramilitary groups that commit violence in the president's name.
Although Trump and his cronies have been secretive about the fund's ends, reporting leaves no doubt that it will be used, among other purposes, to pay the nearly 1,600 people charged with attacking the Capitol, the officers stated in their filing.
The Origins of the Fund
The Justice Department announced the creation of the Anti-Weaponization Fund on Monday. It was established as part of a settlement in which Trump dropped a lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over a years-old leak of his tax returns.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, Trump's former personal attorney, defended the fund before a Senate committee on Tuesday. He claimed it was needed to compensate for what the Democrats and what Biden and what former Attorney General Merrick Garland did for four years. Blanche would not rule out that Trump supporters convicted of attacking police during the Capitol assault would be eligible for payouts, stating that anybody in this country is eligible to apply if they believe they were a victim of weaponization.
Blanche will appoint the five commissioners tasked with overseeing the fund's distributions.
Trump Defends the Payouts
Speaking to reporters on Wednesday, Trump defended the initiative. People were destroyed, they went to jail, their families were ruined, they committed suicide, he said. The Biden administration was horrible. We're reimbursing those people for their legal fees and for their costs.
Trump issued a mass pardon to January 6 defendants on his first day in office last year.
Constitutional Concerns and Fiscal Transparency
The lawsuit, which names Trump, Blanche, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent as defendants, argues that the fund is illegal. No statute authorizes its creation, the settlement on which it is premised is a corrupt sham, and its design violates the Constitution and federal law, the suit claims.
The underlying IRS lawsuit was filed by Trump, his two eldest sons, and the Trump Organization in January, seeking $10 billion in damages over the tax returns leak. A former IRS contractor pleaded guilty in 2023 to leaking the tax returns of Trump and other wealthy Americans to the media and received a five-year prison sentence.
For those who value economic freedom and transparent governance, the creation of this fund raises serious red flags. Using a legal settlement as a vehicle to distribute nearly $1.8 billion in public money, without clear statutory authorization or proper legislative oversight, sets a troubling precedent. When public funds are channeled through opaque mechanisms that reward unlawful behavior, it undermines the very principles of accountability that a free society demands.