Jan. 6 Officers File Lawsuit Over Trump’s $1.8B ‘Anti-Weaponization’ Fund 

Two police officers who faced rioters at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021, have filed a federal lawsuit accusing President Donald Trump’s administration of creating an illegal, $1.776 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund.” They say the fund will bankroll the extremists who targeted them.

In a complaint filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, former U.S. Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn and Metropolitan Police Department officer Daniel Hodges ask a judge to dismantle what they call “the most brazen act of presidential corruption this century.” 

The suit names Trump, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent as defendants. They seek to block the establishment and funding of the Anti-Weaponization Fund and halt any payments from it.

The fund was announced on May 18 as part of a settlement resolving Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over the leak of his tax returns by a former IRS contractor. Trump was President at the time his tax returns were collected and leaked.

Under the deal, the Justice Department agreed to fund $1.776 billion of taxpayer money from the federal Judgment Fund used to pay government legal settlements into a new Anti-Weaponization Fund that can issue apologies and monetary awards to people claiming they were victims of “weaponization and lawfare” under the Biden Administration.

Dunn and Hodges argue the fund is designed to reward nearly 1,600 people charged in connection with the January 6 attack, including members of militant groups such as the Proud Boys, who prosecutors say helped coordinate the assault on the Capitol. They believe the fund will consider time spent in prison and legal fees when deciding payouts. This would allow the federal government to reimburse rioters’ attorneys’ fees and other debts stemming from the insurrection.

The officers argue this is illegal under the Civil War–era Fourteenth Amendment, which forbids the United States from assuming or paying debts “incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion.” By considering rioters’ legal costs and other financial obligations connected to January 6 prosecutions, the plaintiffs say, the Justice Department has committed the government to covering insurrectionists’ debts in direct violation of that constitutional ban.

In January 2025, Trump issued blanket clemency, pardons, and commutations to nearly 1,600 people charged over the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol.

The officers, who have testified publicly about the attack, say they already endure “credible death threats” and harassment from extremists and their supporters, and maintain that the fund’s mere existence will further endanger them. 

They say this signals that violence carried out in Trump’s name will be financially rewarded instead of punished.

Both officers also argue under the Administrative Procedure Act that the Justice and Treasury departments exceeded their statutory powers by inventing a new commission.

The complaint portrays Trump’s original suit against the IRS as a “Potemkin” case filed against agencies he directly controls. It notes that a federal judge had ordered a briefing on whether such a case could even proceed, and alleges the administration rushed to settle for $1.776 billion before that question could be answered, allowing the president to “work out a settlement with myself,” as Trump publicly said.

Dunn and Hodges are asking the court to void the creation of the Anti-Weaponization Fund, cancel the $1.776 billion transfer from the Judgment Fund, and bar any payouts to claimants, including those convicted in the Capitol attack. They are also seeking a declaration that the administration’s actions were unlawful and unconstitutional, as well as reimbursement of their legal fees and costs.