Justice Department declines judge’s request for sworn declarations on $1.8 billion fund
The Facts
- On Friday, the Justice Department declined to submit sworn declarations from senior officials stating that the proposed $1.8 billion fund would not proceed.
- The administration told the court that the requested declarations were unnecessary and said compelling them raised separation-of-powers concerns.
- U.S. District Judge Leonie Brinkema had asked for declarations from Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward.
- Brinkema last week extended or continued an injunction blocking the fund from moving forward while the legal challenge proceeds.
- The fund was described by the administration as a program to compensate people who said they were victims of prosecutorial or government overreach under prior administrations.
- The judge indicated that sworn declarations could support dismissing the lawsuit or finding the dispute moot, but the Justice Department argued existing testimony and court filings already showed the fund would not move forward.
- Because the declarations were not filed, the lawsuit over the fund remains unresolved and the court’s block stays in place for now.
How left and right are reading this
- Both agree
- The fund remains blocked and the lawsuit unresolved because the administration refused the judge’s requested sworn declarations, leaving the court to rely on existing filings while the legal challenge continues.
- They split on
- Less a disagreement than a question of emphasis: the refusal to put the administration’s position under oath, versus the separation-of-powers objection to a judge compelling senior officials to provide those declarations.
Context
What did the judge ask the administration to do?
Judge Leonie Brinkema asked Todd Blanche, Scott Bessent and Stanley Woodward to file declarations under penalty of perjury stating that they would not create or operate the fund and that it would not proceed under any name Aol,TimesNow,New Republic.
Why did the Justice Department say it would not file those declarations?
The department said the declarations were unnecessary because Blanche’s congressional testimony and prior court filings already stated that the fund was not moving forward, and it argued that forcing sworn statements from senior executive officials raised separation-of-powers concerns CNN International,Washington Examiner,news.bloomberglaw.c….
What happens next in the case?
The immediate result is that the fund remains blocked by the court’s injunction, and the lawsuit continues because the judge had suggested sworn declarations were a condition for ending the case without further litigation CNBC,Court House News Se…,MyCentralOregon.com.
Facts first. Then every angle.
The day’s biggest stories in one short brief — the facts everyone agrees on, then the competing values behind the headlines. Free in your inbox.
View all 28 sources
Independent coverage (28)
About these frames
See this differently than someone you know would? Two ways to keep it going.
The dial works on any URL — paste an article you read elsewhere this week.