Jan. 6 police officers sue to block Trump’s $1.8B fund

Police who responded to the U.S. Capitol riots involving President Donald Trump’s supporters in 2021 are suing to block the creation of a government “anti-weaponization” fund, alleging that it’s “the most brazen act of presidential corruption this century.”

Processing Content

The lawsuit, filed Wednesday morning in Washington federal court, follows this week’s announcement of the nearly $1.8 billion fund as part of an agreement to end Trump’s unprecedented $10 billion lawsuit against the government he leads, accusing the Internal Revenue Service of liability for a 2019 leak of his tax information. 

The current and former officers who sued accused the Justice and Treasury Departments of agreeing to launch the compensation program without legal authority and of putting their safety at risk if payouts go to people involved in the Jan. 6, 2021, Capitol attack.

“By its very existence, the fund encourages those who enacted violence in the president’s name to continue to do so,” the complaint alleges.

The plaintiffs are two of the most prominent officers who were involved in Jan. 6, Harry Dunn and Daniel Hodges. Dunn, a retired Capitol Police officer, is running for a US House seat in Maryland as a Democrat. Hodges is a Metropolitan Police Department officer. Both men testified about their experiences as part of a congressional inquiry.

During a Senate hearing this week, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche didn’t rule out the possibility that people charged or convicted in connection with Jan. 6, including those who assaulted police officers, could be eligible for payments from the new fund. Trump granted pardons or other executive clemency to the more than 1,500 people charged as part of that federal criminal investigation when he took office last year.

Spokespeople for the Justice and Treasury Departments did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

According to the Justice Department, five commissioners appointed by Blanche will manage the fund and set up the procedures for claims. 

As part of the agreement in Trump’s IRS case, the agency is also “forever barred” from pursuing investigations or claims related to his tax returns that arose before this week.

The new “anti-weaponization” compensation program would be financed by the so-called Judgment Fund, which receives congressional appropriations to cover court judgments and settlements against the government, according to the agreement between Trump’s personal lawyers in the IRS case and Justice Department officials he appointed.

The Justice Department said in a press release that there won’t be “partisan requirements to file a claim.” However, the IRS case agreement references Biden administration policies and investigations and “the sustained use of the levers of government power by Democrat elected officials, political and career federal employees, contractors, and agents” as examples of “lawfare and weaponization.”

Dunn and Hodges argue that the laws creating the Judgment Fund didn’t give the Justice Department separate, independent authority to create a new commission or compensation structure for people seeking monetary damages from federal agencies.

They allege that Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS wasn’t a legitimate case to begin with because of the president’s control of both sides, so it wasn’t eligible for a settlement from the Judgment Fund. They also claim the government is taking on the “debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States” in violation of the US Constitution.

They’re asking a judge to declare the new program unlawful and to block any transfer of money from the Judgment Fund to support it.

The case is Dunn v. Bessent, 26-cv-1719, US District Court, District of Columbia (Washington).