Anti-Weaponization Fund Dies, Claimants Pivot to FTCA
Get the Geopolitics newsletter
Daily geopolitics — wars, elections, sanctions, the diplomatic moves that move markets. Free.
- Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche said Trump's 'anti-weaponization' fund would 'not be moving forward,' but he has refused to put that commitment in writing or withdraw the memo, and President Trump told reporters he'd 'have to ask the lawyers' about whether the fund was truly dead.
- Jan. 6 defendants and self-described 'weaponization' victims are filing claims under the Federal Tort Claims Act, which gives a two-year window to file after an incident and allows the government to settle quickly without judicial scrutiny using the unlimited Judgment Fund.
- Michael Caputo, a former HHS spokesperson under Trump's first term and early applicant to the anti-weaponization fund over the Crossfire Hurricane investigation, called the fund's end 'a brief distraction' and said FTCA filings are 'a beginning for everybody whose life was destroyed by political weaponization.'
- Florida attorney Peter Ticktin told The Hill he has begun FTCA filings for roughly 200 of his clients, with more expected.
- Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) steered claimants toward the existing FTCA process on X on June 2, writing: 'We have a legal system already in place for people to make claims against the government. That does not need to be reinvented.'
- The Senate failed late Thursday to formally block the anti-weaponization fund, and Rep. Dan Goldman (D-N.Y.) warned that without new guardrails on FTCA claims, claimants will simply 'do it a different way.'
- Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) called for stricter Judgment Fund rules to bar convicted Jan. 6 rioters from collecting, calling the original fund 'a slush fund that shouldn't exist at all.'
Why it matters: The political fight over the anti-weaponization fund may be largely symbolic: the FTCA route has no spending cap, allows settlements without judicial review, and is already being used by attorneys representing Jan. 6 defendants. If the administration wants to pay these claimants, the Judgment Fund gives it a ready-made vehicle that bypasses both Congress and the courts — making the fund's 'end' a messaging win, not a policy one.
