Judge Demands Sworn Oath to Kill Trump's $1.8 Billion Slush Fund

The ruling in the Eastern District of Virginia forces Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward Jr., and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to provide a clear, unambiguous statement within one week. While the Department of Justice previously argued the matter was moot due to public comments, Brinkema rejected that stance, noting the government’s refusal to formally rescind the directive or swear under oath that the money would not be disbursed. The judge characterized the proposed arrangement—taxpayer funds designated for individuals involved in conduct many deem unacceptable—as fundamentally problematic.

Democracy Forward, the watchdog group behind the legal challenge, hailed the injunction as a significant victory. Plaintiffs in the case include the National Abortion Federation, the city of New Haven, and a former federal prosecutor, all of whom argued the fund would cause irreparable harm. Despite the court-ordered halt, concerns persist regarding alternative strategies. Reports suggest administration allies are exploring the 1946 Federal Tort Claims Act as a potential workaround to facilitate out-of-court settlements. Omar Noureldin of Common Cause warned that the administration remains untrustworthy with public funds, signaling that the legal pressure will continue until the scheme is fully dismantled.