Claws Out

PabloReports: What do you make of this $1.7 billion slush fund that Trump is proposing for Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, and pardoned fraudsters?

Raskin: It’s illegal, unconstitutional, and outrageous. Congress controls the spending of money from the federal government, and we never… pic.twitter.com/gcfg0eUhd7

— Acyn (@Acyn) May 15, 2026

PabloReports: What do you make of this $1.7 billion slush fund that Trump is proposing for Proud Boys, Oath Keepers, and pardoned fraudsters?

Raskin: It’s illegal, unconstitutional, and outrageous. Congress controls the spending of money from the federal government, and we never voted to establish a $1.7 billion fund to pay off insurrectionists and his extremist private militias, and we would never spend money on that. So it needs to be blocked. It’s an absolute corruption and prostitution of the Judgment Fund.

Can you say "clawback”? I thought you could.

 Department of the Treasury:

Under Public Law 116-9, passed in March 2019, the Department of the Treasury is required to make Judgment Fund payment information available to the public on a website no later than 30 days after a payment is made. To comply with the law, data is posted every 2 weeks here on the Judgment Fund website and includes the following information:

The name of the specific agency or entity whose actions gave rise to the claim or judgment,
The name of the plaintiff or claimant,
The name of counsel for the plaintiff or claimant,
The amount paid, representing principal liability, and any amounts paid representing any ancillary liability, including attorney fees, costs, and interest,
A brief description of the facts that gave rise to the claim,
The name of the agency that submitted the claim.

Sunlight is a disinfectant.

One other thing:

The Judgment Fund pays court judgments and compromise settlements of lawsuits against the government. Federal agencies may ask the Bureau of the Fiscal Service to pay from the Judgment Fund for:

Most court judgments and Justice Department settlements of actual or imminent litigation against the government
Administrative claim awards (settlements by agencies at the administrative level, not involving a lawsuit)
An agency may only ask for payment from the Judgment Fund if funds are not legally available to pay from the agency's own appropriations.

If another source of funds exists to pay the award, the Judgment Fund cannot be used even if the other source does not have enough money. In that case, the agency with the other source of funds must ask Congress to appropriate more money for that other source.

Here's where the trial court may yet hold onto the case to disallow any settlement because this case is not “actual litigation” within the meaning of  31 USC 1304.

Trump filed this case after entering office, which makes it void ab initio, and should block any recovery from the Judgement Fund. I’m not sure how that claim could be asserted, but it may be possible for the court to assert it on its own motion, since the authority of the court has been invoked in order to conduct what amounts to a clearly illegal act (no settlement of litigation means no access to Judgment Fund).

Either way, Congress can certainly address it in ‘27, including clawing back the funds if they are disbursed, and blocking any AG appointment who was in in this crime.