Holding the law against perjury over the heads of top Trump Administration officials, a federal judge on Friday ordered them to assure her formally that the $1.8 billion fund to compensate allies of President Trump has been shut down and will not be revived “in any manner.”

U.S. District Judge Leonie M. Brinkema of Alexandria, VA, issued a new and more forceful order against the so-called “Anti-Weaponization Fund” that was created last month.  The plan was to use U.S. Treasury money to pay claims that the Biden Administration had used the criminal law to target Trump’s followers, perhaps including those who were prosecuted for federal crimes based on rioting at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.

Although the Administration has issued a variety of public statements in response to sharp public criticism of the Fund, the Virginia judge clearly was not satisfied.  The judge gave three top officials – Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, and one of Blanche’s assistants, Stanley Woodward, Jr. — one week to submit “a declaration under the penalty of perjury” that the Fund will not go any further.

If they comply, she indicated, she will close a lawsuit seeking to strike down the Fund.  If the officials don’t comply, the judge added, the lawsuit will go forward to assess the legality of such a project.

It is unclear whether Judge Brinkema was aware of news stories on Thursday reporting that Justice Department officials were exploring alternative ways to pursue the same kind of payment scheme using other sources of money.  President Trump has called the Fund “beautiful,” and other officials have made it clear that the idea has strong appeal within the Administration.

The judge in Virginia, while moving to get formal notice of the end of the Fund, issued a new order barring temporarily any action to set up the Fund, start its operation, or make any payments.  She also ordered the return of any payments that might already have been made.

She also specified that by next Friday the Administration officials must file a report showing how they are obeying the other parts of today’s order.

The Trump legal team has been seeking to prevent several lawsuits against the Fund from proceeding, arguing that the cases no longer are live controversies because the government has ended the Fund.  A federal judge in Washington, D.C., handling another of the cases, on Wednesday explicitly granted that request, and the Trump lawyers notified Judge Brinkema of that development on Thursday.

The more that federal judges demand from the Administration about the Fund’s status, the more difficult it would be for the Administration to find legal alternatives in an attempt to salvage the project or something like it.  Critics of the Fund and of the promise made, as part of the project, of lifetime immunity for the Trumps from back-tax obligations have argued that the entire project violates federal law and Justice Department procedures.

Meanwhile, later today, the Trump legal team is due to file a legal brief in another of these anti-Fund cases, the one pending before a federal judge in Miami.  It was in that court that the Anti-Weaponization Fund was first revealed, and the way for it cleared, by settlement of a $10 billion lawsuit by Donald Trump, two of his sons and the main family business in a dispute over illegal disclosure of their private federal tax returns.

U.S. District Judge Kathleen M. Williams is pondering a complaint, made by a group of retired federal judges, that the now-settled lawsuit was a frivolous legal claim that was pursued to commit a “fraud on the court.”   

Under a federal court rule, Rule 11, the judge has the authority to punish lawyers and parties who are responsible for such misconduct.  Since Rule 11 binds both lawyers and their clients,   Judge Williams could penalize the President, his sons and the Trump organization, as well as the lawyers representing them in the lawsuit, if she concludes that Rule 11 has been violated.

It is not likely that Judge Williams will complete her review of the misconduct issue today.  The retired judges who brought up that complaint have until next Friday to offer their own legal brief in the proceeding.