Judge Rejects Bid to Block Admin Fund  06/11 06:03

   A federal judge on Wednesday rejected a government watchdog's request for a 
court order temporarily blocking the Trump administration from forging ahead 
with a new $1.776 billion settlement fund for compensating people who claim to 
be victims of a weaponized government.

   WASHINGTON (AP) -- A federal judge on Wednesday rejected a government 
watchdog's request for a court order temporarily blocking the Trump 
administration from forging ahead with a new $1.776 billion settlement fund for 
compensating people who claim to be victims of a weaponized government.

   But the judge ended a hearing by issuing a "fair warning" to President 
Donald Trump's administration: "Don't play possum with this court," U.S. 
District Judge Richard Leon told a government attorney.

   Leon ruled from the bench in favor of the administration, which argued that 
the watchdog's lawsuit is moot because acting Attorney General Todd Blanche 
told Congress earlier this month that the government is scrapping its plans for 
the fund. Leon, who was nominated to the bench by Republican President George 
W. Bush, said he accepts Blanche's representation for now.

   The judge's refusal to issue a temporary restraining order isn't the final 
word on the fate of the government's "Anti-Weaponization Fund." Leon said he 
will consider a separate request by the plaintiffs -- Citizens for 
Responsibility and Ethics in Washington -- for a preliminary injunction that 
would block payouts from the fund on a more permanent basis.

   A different federal judge, sitting in Alexandria, Virginia, already has 
temporarily blocked the fund's operations. However, that order by U.S. District 
Judge Leonie Brinkema is due to expire Friday unless she extends it after a 
hearing on the same day.

   The administration created the fund last month to resolve Trump's lawsuit 
against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax returns. The 
Justice Department hasn't formed the five-member commission that will decide on 
payout criteria, so there has been no money paid out nor claims accepted.

   The fund has generated a fierce bipartisan backlash. Even many of the 
Republican president's allies are opposed to compensating rioters who stormed 
the U.S. Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021. During a May 19 congressional hearing, 
Blanche wouldn't rule out the possibility that rioters who assaulted police at 
the Capitol could be eligible for fund payouts.

   Later, during a House hearing on June 2, Blanche said, "We are not moving 
forward with the fund, period."

   "Not moving forward ever?" asked Rep. Grace Meng, a New York Democrat.

   "Correct," Blanche answered.

   Leon asked Justice Department attorney Andrew Block why Blanche doesn't 
formally rescind his May 18 order establishing the fund.

   "I don't know the reason for that," Block said.

   Block said Blanche's statements to Congress are sufficient to moot the 
watchdog's claims. He also argued that the group doesn't have the legal 
standing to bring them.

   Plaintiffs' attorney Nikhel Sus noted that Trump himself contradicted 
Blanche's testimony. During an interview on June 3, a day after Blanche's House 
testimony, Trump expressed support for continuing with the fund despite the 
Virginia judge's ruling against it.

   "On paper, the fund is still a legally operating entity," Sus said. "Nothing 
has changed."

   A federal judge in Florida overseeing Trump's lawsuit against the IRS 
ordered Trump's attorneys to respond to "grievous allegations" by settlement 
critics that the president abandoned his claims to avoid the court's scrutiny 
of an illegal deal. U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams gave them until 
Friday to respond in writing to allegations of collusion and whether the case 
should be reopened because the court was the "victim of a fraud."

   In Virginia, attorneys from the legal advocacy group Democracy Forward are 
seeking a court order halting the fund's implementation and preventing the 
Trump administration from disbursing any payouts from it. The plaintiffs in the 
Virginia case include a fired prosecutor and a college professor acquitted of 
assaulting federal agents at a protest.