Close Menu
New York Daily News Online
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram Pinterest YouTube
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram YouTube TikTok
    New York Daily News OnlineNew York Daily News Online
    • Home
    • US News
    • Politics
    • Business
    • Technology
    • Science
    • Books
    • Film
    • Music
    • Television
    • LifeStyle
    • Contact
      • About
      • Amazon Disclaimer
      • DMCA / Copyrights Disclaimer
      • Privacy Policy
      • Terms and Conditions
    New York Daily News Online
    Home»Politics

    Bill Cassidy signs brief calling ‘weaponization’ fund a ‘dire threat’

    AdminBy AdminJune 7, 2026 Politics
    Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email Reddit
    Bill Cassidy signs brief calling ‘weaponization’ fund a ‘dire threat’

    Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA) speaks during the CNBC CEO Council Summit in Washington D.C. on June 2, 2026.

    Aaron Clamage | CNBC

    Louisiana Republican Sen. Bill Cassidy signed onto an amicus brief calling President Donald Trump‘s “anti-weaponization” fund a “dire threat” to Congress and the constitutional order.

    The amicus brief from Cassidy and Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., was filed Wednesday in a case challenging the fund that’s working its way through court in Virginia. Cassidy last month lost out of a runoff in Louisiana amid a Trump-backed primary challenge, and Congress is weighing amendments to a budget reconciliation bill that could ax the “lawfare” fund entirely.

    Cassidy’s inclusion on the brief is a window into the broad opposition to the fund from Senate Republicans, who rarely buck Trump due to potential political consequences. It also underscores how Cassidy, who has no more elections to run, could complicate future votes in the Senate.

    The brief contends that the court, which halted the fund temporarily in May, should uphold its block. The senators argued that the fund represents an “immediate and dire threat to our constitutional order and the authority of Congress.”

    “The existence of the Fund strikes at the core of Congressional authority and our Constitutional order,” the senators said.

    Read more CNBC politics coverage

    The lawmakers say the fund violates the “Spending, Appropriations, and Appointments,” while stepping on Congress’ authority over the federal purse. They argue it could also financially compensate convicted violent rioters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, trying to disrupt the certification of former President Joe Biden‘s electoral victory.

    “To deliberately deploy public funds, in violation of the Constitution and the laws of this nation, to compensate these perpetrators is to use the machinery of democratic government to subsidize an attack on that government’s most fundamental processes,” the brief reads.

    The fund originated as part of a settlement of Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service for the leak of his tax returns. In exchange for dropping that case, the Justice Department set up a $1.8 billion legal relief fund to compensate victims of what the administration calls “lawfare.”

    Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche testified Tuesday before Congress that the Justice Department has permanently abandoned the weaponization fund and would not pursue it regardless of the outcome in court. Trump and his family, however, maintain protected from audit and other tax enforcement actions in connection with tax returns filed before last month’s out-of-court settlement of his lawsuit, as per the original settlement that created the fund.

    And Trump, speaking with reporters Wednesday in the Oval Office, said he didn’t know if it’s “dead” or “on hold,” saying he’d have to “ask the lawyers.”

    Critics have argued the DOJ’s initial statement saying it would not proceed with the fund did not make clear whether the department had dropped any plans for the fund, and are eyeing a more permanent solution.

    “The Court should maintain an injunction against the implementation of the Anti-Weaponization Fund and ultimately render judgment for the Plaintiffs in this matter,” the senators said in the brief.

    Choose CNBC as your preferred source on Google and never miss a moment from the most trusted name in business news.

    Read the original article here

    Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email Reddit

    you might also be interested in...

    Prediction market firms face growing scrutiny as Congress weighs rules

    Inside the Obama-era Iran nuclear deal that Trump withdrew from

    Trump wants Bill Pulte to fire intelligence workers

    Trump says he could meet Iran’s supreme leader ‘if it was to make a deal’

    Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang invited to Senate hearing on China AI chips

    Finland’s Stubb says EU should expand to 40 states, including Canada

    Popular Posts

    Navy Blue’s New Album Features Ka, Earl Sweatshirt, and James Earl Jones

    US States Are Reportedly Planning To Sue To Block Paramount’s Warner Bros. Takeover

    New SKA boss Jessica Dempsey did what before becoming an astronomer? – Physics World

    Prediction market firms face growing scrutiny as Congress weighs rules

    How Many of Barnes & Noble’s Best Books of the Year So Far Have You Read?

    COTW: These Characters Were Messy, Heartbreaking & Impossible to Ignore

    Categories
    • Books (2,089)
    • Business (2,942)
    • Cover Story (45)
    • Events (77)
    • Feature (1)
    • Film (1,535)
    • LifeStyle (2,270)
    • Music (2,455)
    • Politics (1,941)
    • Science (2,382)
    • Technology (2,325)
    • Television (2,459)
    • Uncategorized (34)
    • US News (2,785)
    Archives
    Useful Links
    • Contact
    • About
    • Amazon Disclaimer
    • DMCA / Copyrights Disclaimer
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms and Conditions
    Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram YouTube TikTok
    © 2026 New York Daily News Online. All rights reserved. All articles, images, product names, logos, and brands are property of their respective owners. All company, product and service names used in this website are for identification purposes only. Use of these names, logos, and brands does not imply endorsement unless specified. By using this site, you agree to the Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.

    Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.