Two police officers who defended the U.S. Capitol during the January 6, 2021 riot filed a federal lawsuit to stop the Trump administration’s $1.8 billion Anti-Weaponization Fund from compensating anyone, as pardoned rioters prepare applications expecting major payouts.

Officers Challenge Controversial Fund

Daniel Hodges, a Washington D.C. police officer who suffered repeated assaults and was crushed in a door frame by January 6 rioters, joined another Capitol defender in the lawsuit arguing the newly-announced fund is both illegal and dangerous. The Justice Department indicated the fund will compensate an unspecified group of people who suffered from what they call weaponization and lawfare under previous presidential administrations. Officials widely expect at least some money will flow to Trump supporters who attacked the Capitol and later received presidential pardons.

Hodges questioned the logic behind the payments. The officer asked why the government would pay people who attacked police at the Capitol and tried to stop the peaceful transfer of power, or those who wanted to assassinate the vice president. Meanwhile, former January 6 defendants are already preparing their applications and anticipating significant financial rewards from the fund.

Administration Refuses to Rule Out Violent Offenders

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche and Vice President JD Vance declined to exclude payments to January 6 rioters convicted of violent crimes against police officers when questioned by Congress members and reporters. Vance stated at the White House on Tuesday that the administration is not making commitments to give anybody money, only commitments to review cases individually. The Justice Department has not specified who qualifies for compensation or what criteria will determine eligibility for the fund.

Criminal Records Raise Concerns

An NPR investigation revealed that criminal records of January 6 rioters pardoned by Trump include serious offenses such as rape and domestic violence beyond their Capitol attack convictions. The administration has not addressed how prior criminal history will factor into fund distribution decisions. The lawsuit from Capitol defenders seeks to block any disbursements while courts determine the fund’s legality and whether compensating individuals who committed violent acts against law enforcement officers serves legitimate government purposes or violates constitutional principles.