A federal judge in Washington, D.C., declined to immediately block the Trump administration’s proposed ‘Anti-Weaponization’ fund after government lawyers stated that the program is no longer moving forward. The lawsuit was brought by the watchdog organization Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington (CREW), which argued that the fund was created unlawfully and designed to operate with limited transparency. According to CREW, the program could have been used to provide financial support to individuals allied with President Donald Trump who had been investigated for criminal matters.
U.S. District Judge Richard Leon, who was appointed by former President George W. Bush, accepted the Justice Department’s representation that the fund had effectively been abandoned. As a result, he did not grant CREW’s request for a temporary restraining order at this stage. However, Leon expressed skepticism during the hearing and warned government attorneys that the court would closely scrutinize any future attempt to revive the program.
The judge questioned why the Justice Department had not formally rescinded the order establishing the fund if it was truly canceled. When asked, a department lawyer reportedly said he did not know why no formal rescission had occurred. Leon cautioned the government not to mislead the court, emphasizing that the matter could return to litigation if circumstances change.
CREW maintained that if the administration genuinely intends to abandon the fund, it should provide formal written confirmation. The controversy comes as Senate Republicans considered, but ultimately did not adopt, provisions in a Homeland Security reconciliation bill that would have eliminated or restricted the fund’s use. The dispute highlights ongoing concerns about government transparency, executive authority, and oversight of special funding mechanisms.
Original title: Judge warns Trump DOJ against slush fund in courtroom grilling: ‘Don’t play possum!’
The AI system has determined that this news is clickbait/sensationalist: The original headline uses emotionally charged language such as 'slush fund,' 'courtroom grilling,' and the quoted phrase 'Don't play possum!' to attract attention and create drama. While it is based on actual events described in the article, the wording is more sensational than a neutral summary of the court proceedings. This has coincided with the opinion of the majority of users.
