US Judge Orders Disclosure of Names Behind Trump Administration’s Controversial ‘Weaponization’ Fund

A federal judge has ordered the US Justice Department to disclose the names of people who devised the structure of a controversial fund that could have been used to pay allies of President Donald Trump.

 

The lawsuit, filed in Virginia by a group of Trump administration critics, challenges a now-defunct plan to create a $1.8 billion fund for victims of alleged government “weaponisation”. The fund emerged as part of a settlement of Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against his own administration over the disclosure of his tax information several years ago.

 

Attorney General Todd Blanche has said the fund is not moving forward. Another part of the agreement, which would shield Trump, several members of his family and his company from audits into past tax filings, remains in effect.

 

The plaintiffs had sought the identities of people involved not only in creating or implementing the fund and the broader settlement agreement, but also in the “conception” of its terms.

 

At a hearing in federal court in Alexandria on Friday, US Magistrate Judge Ivan Davis said the request was too broad because it “starts to smack of a fishing expedition”.

 

Instead, Davis proposed, and subsequently ordered, that the government disclose the names of those who devised the structure of the fund.

 

“Today’s order granting discovery is a significant step in getting to the bottom of the slush fund,” said Aman George, senior counsel at Democracy Forward, a liberal-leaning advocacy group representing the plaintiffs.

 

The Justice Department did not immediately respond to a request for comment on the order.

 

The plaintiffs in the Virginia lawsuit include a former federal prosecutor who pursued charges related to the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol, when Congress was certifying the results of the 2020 presidential election. Trump lost that election to former President Joe Biden.

 

Defendants in those criminal cases were expected to benefit from the proposed “weaponisation” fund after Trump issued a mass pardon for them in 2025 following his return to the presidency.

 

Another plaintiff is a federal employee union that alleges the audit immunity is unlawful and could force Internal Revenue Service workers to violate their oaths of office.

 

The case is Floyd v. Department of Justice, 26-cv-1399, US District Court, Eastern District of Virginia (Alexandria).

 

For enquiries or further information, contact ask@tlr.ae or call +971 52 644 3004. Follow The Law Reporters on WhatsApp Channels.