A federal judge has refused to take the Trump administration at its word that its $1.78 billion Justice Department “Anti-Weaponization Fund” is dead — and she now wants three of the most powerful officials in government to swear it under oath, on penalty of perjury.
On June 12, 2026, U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema of the Eastern District of Virginia extended an order blocking the roughly $1.78 billion fund, saying the record before her did not show the plan had actually been abandoned. By about June 19, the administration is expected to file a sworn declaration that it “will not take any action to create or operate the Anti-Weaponization Fund.”
What the Fund Was Supposed to Do
The Anti-Weaponization Fund was pitched as a pool of money tied to the Justice Department — but critics argued the name described the opposite of its likely effect. Far from preventing the politicization of federal law enforcement, they warned, a discretionary fund of that size could become a tool to direct the department’s power at political targets.
That concern drew pushback from lawmakers in both parties. The resistance eventually led the administration to signal the plan would not move forward. But signaling is not the same as stopping, and that distinction is exactly what landed the matter back in front of Judge Brinkema.
Why the Judge Isn’t Convinced
Brinkema said the evidence did not establish that the fund was truly off the table. She pointed in particular to President Trump, who has continued to voice support for the concept in recent public statements even as officials told Congress it would not proceed. To the judge, those mixed messages left open the possibility that the administration could quietly revive the plan under a different name or structure.
So rather than simply trusting the assurances, she extended the block and demanded something far harder to walk back: a sworn declaration. The administration has about one week — putting the deadline around June 19 — to put in writing, under penalty of perjury, that it will not create or operate the fund in any form.
The Officials on the Hook
The declaration is expected to come from three top officials: Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, and Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward Jr. Each would be personally attesting that the fund is finished. If any of them later tried to bring it back after signing, they could be exposed to perjury — a serious legal jeopardy that ordinary political reversals do not carry.
That is the power of the judge’s move. It converts a soft political promise into a hard legal commitment with real consequences. Brinkema signaled that if the sworn statement is filed on time, she is likely to drop the case — meaning the administration can end the litigation, but only by closing the door on the fund for good.
What This Means for Americans
At its core, this is a fight over whether the machinery of federal law enforcement can be steered for political ends — and whether the people in charge can be held to their word. By forcing a sworn declaration, the court is insisting on accountability rather than accepting assurances that could evaporate after the headlines fade. For anyone who cares about an even-handed Justice Department, the next move belongs to the officials being asked to sign their names. The clock is running.
Stay informed on the stories that matter most. Follow Your Daily Updates on Facebook and bookmark yourdailyupdates.news for breaking news and analysis.