U.S. Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) announced Monday he is introducing two pieces of legislation designed to shut down the Trump administration’s newly created $1.776 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” calling the taxpayer-backed program a corrupt slush fund and vowing congressional action to stop it before any payments are distributed. Schiff’s move comes as legal challenges, bipartisan concern in Congress, and a federal lawsuit from Capitol Police officers have converged into one of the most contentious domestic controversies of the Trump administration’s second term.
In a post on X on May 26, 2026, Senator Schiff wrote in full: “Trump’s multi-billion-dollar slush fund is the most brazen act of self-dealing corruption we’ve ever seen. We need to shut it down before he uses it to pay cop beaters, cronies, and other criminals. I’m introducing legislation to stop it.”
What the Fund Is and How It Was Created
The U.S. Department of Justice announced the Anti-Weaponization Fund as part of a settlement agreement in the case of President Donald J. Trump v. Internal Revenue Service. The plaintiffs in the case — President Trump, Donald J. Trump Jr., Eric Trump, and the Trump Organization — had filed suit against the Treasury and IRS in a Southern District of Florida federal court following the leak of their tax returns. Per the terms of the settlement, the plaintiffs received a formal apology but no monetary payment or damages of any kind.
The nearly $1.8 billion in taxpayer money used for the fund comes from what is known as the Judgment Fund — a pool of money Congress continuously appropriates for the government to pay legal claims filed against it. The fund will receive $1.776 billion — a figure that is a nod to the country’s founding year — and will consist of five members appointed by the attorney general, with one member chosen in consultation with congressional leadership.
The Justice Department stated the fund is designed to compensate anyone who has been a “victim of lawfare and weaponization,” and that there are no partisan requirements to file a claim. However, neither the Justice Department nor the White House specified the criteria for who would be eligible for an award from the new fund, or whether there would be a cap on individual payouts.
Schiff’s Two Bills
Details of Schiff’s legislation were first shared with Semafor ahead of their formal introduction. The first bill would ban payouts from the congressionally approved Judgment Fund in lawsuits brought by the president or vice president, made retroactive to January 2025. The second proposal would prevent the Anti-Weaponization Fund from making payments to the president and vice president, members of Congress and their staff, political appointees, senior executive branch employees, and presidential campaign employees.
Schiff is set to introduce both bills the week of June 2 and may attempt to attach them as amendments to Republicans’ party-line immigration enforcement bill, which is expected on the Senate floor, according to a person familiar with his strategy. In a statement accompanying the legislative push, Schiff called the fund “the most brazen act of self-dealing corruption we’ve ever seen,” and said it must be stopped before being used to pay “cop beaters, cronies and other criminals.”
The January 6 Question
Central to the controversy is the unresolved question of whether individuals convicted or pardoned in connection with the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot could receive payouts from the fund. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, a personal attorney for President Trump before joining the Justice Department, defended the fund’s creation during a congressional hearing and would not rule out the possibility that rioters who assaulted police on January 6 would be eligible for fund payouts.
Over 1,600 people were charged with January 6-related crimes, but Trump used his pardon powers to erase all of those cases in a sweeping act of clemency. The prospect that some of those individuals could now receive financial compensation from a taxpayer-funded account has drawn sharp condemnation from Democrats and law enforcement alike.
Capitol Officers File Federal Lawsuit
The legislative push from Schiff came alongside a separate legal challenge from law enforcement. Two police officers who helped defend the U.S. Capitol from the attack filed a federal lawsuit seeking to block anyone — including January 6 rioters — from receiving payouts from the fund. Former Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn and Metropolitan Police Department Officer Daniel Hodges argued in their filing that the fund is an illegal slush fund that Trump will use to “finance the insurrectionists and paramilitary groups that commit violence in his name.”
Officers Dunn and Hodges alleged that the creation of the fund is arbitrary and capricious — a violation of the Administrative Procedures Act — and runs afoul of a prohibition in the Fourteenth Amendment barring the government from funding insurrections. “No statute authorizes its creation, the settlement on which it is premised is a corrupt sham, and its design violates the Constitution,” the lawsuit stated.
DOJ’s Defense of the Fund
The Justice Department has pushed back on characterizations of the fund as a partisan instrument. In a summary memo provided to Republican senators, the DOJ said the fund was created to help people “who were victims of lawfare and weaponization,” including millions of Americans “whose online speech was censored at the behest of the government, parents silenced at school boards, senators whose records were secretly subpoenaed, and churchgoers targeted by the FBI.” The memo also indicated that the Trump family cannot benefit from the fund, though it did not specify how that restriction would be enforced, and stated that “there is no partisan restriction” on who may submit a claim.
The fund is set to be run by a commission whose members are chosen by Trump’s attorney general and who can be fired by the president at any time. Legal experts have questioned whether that structure provides any meaningful independence or oversight.
Legal Experts Call It Unprecedented
Legal experts have said the fund is unprecedented in its structure. Unlike comparable settlement funds in U.S. history, the Justice Department’s fund will be distributed to a third party entirely unrelated to the underlying case. Additionally, unlike previous settlement funds, the Anti-Weaponization Fund will operate with no judicial oversight whatsoever.
Schiff’s effort to claw back the fund also follows his earlier introduction of the Corruption Clawback Act, legislation designed to recover taxpayer dollars paid to presidents through settlements or judgments resulting from undue influence or coercion from the White House. That bill came in response to Trump suing the federal government and demanding his own Justice Department repay him more than $230 million for past legal matters.
What Comes Next
Senator Schiff’s two new bills face long odds in the Republican-controlled Senate, where the majority has shown little appetite for legislation that directly challenges the Trump administration’s use of the Judgment Fund. However, his strategy of attempting to attach the measures as amendments to a must-pass immigration enforcement bill in the coming week could force a procedural vote that puts members of both parties on record regarding the fund. As legal challenges proceed in federal court and the five-member commission moves toward accepting claims, the fight over who ultimately receives money from the Anti-Weaponization Fund — and under what authority it was created — appears headed for further escalation on both Capitol Hill and in the courts.