List of Republicans Against Trump's Weaponization Fund Grows-‘Bad Idea'
Former Vice President Mike Pence on Sunday became the latest prominent Republican to break with the Trump administration over its controversial $1.8 billion "anti-weaponization" fund, calling the proposal "deeply offensive" and urging that it be scrapped.
Pence's remarks place him among a growing number of high-profile Republicans who have voiced opposition in recent days, expanding what began as a Capitol Hill backlash into a broader intra-party dispute. His intervention comes after some Senate and House Republicans publicly criticized the fund, signaling widening fractures within the GOP over the proposal.
The expanding list of Republican critics has complicated President Donald Trump's legislative agenda at a critical moment, with GOP divisions over the fund already delaying a major immigration funding package. Some Republicans have warned the fund could become a political liability for the party heading into the 2026 elections if it is not addressed.
What Is the Anti-Weaponization Fund?
At issue is not only the nearly $1.8 billion in federal money tied to the settlement, but also broader concerns about executive authority, the use of taxpayer funds, and potential eligibility for individuals convicted in connection with the January 6, 2021, U.S. Capitol riot when Trump supporters sought to overturn the 2020 presidential election results.
The fund was created as part of a settlement between the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Trump to resolve his $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) over leaked tax returns. In exchange for dropping the case, the DOJ established the fun, which would allow individuals who claim they were victims of government "weaponization" to apply for compensation or formal apologies through a commission reviewing claims through 2028.
The DOJ described the fund as a “systematic process to hear and redress claims of others who suffered weaponization and lawfare.” Trump and his allies have argued that Biden-era law enforcement unfairly targeted conservatives, including through cases involving Trump and some people charged over January 6.
“The Department remains extremely confident in the legality of the Anti-Weaponization Fund which is supported by ample precedent, including Obama-era settlements,” a DOJ spokesperson told Newsweek via email on Friday. “We will not allow the policy preferences of judges to interfere with our efforts to provide restitution to victims of lawfare.”
On Sunday, the White House referred Newsweek to the DOJ.
Republicans Opposing the Fund
The list of prominent Republicans opposed to Trump’s anti-weaponization fund is growing and now includes Senators Bill Cassidy, Thom Tillis and Mitch McConnell.
Opposition from within the GOP spans leadership, rank-and-file lawmakers, and prominent conservative voices, many of whom have used unusually pointed language to describe the proposal:
- Mike Pence (Former Vice President): Appearing on NBC News' Meet the Press on Sunday, Pence stated, "Well, look, I think that the weaponization fund is a bad idea from the start. And I would encourage the administration just to drop it." During the attack on the Capitol, rioters chanted “Hang Mike Pence” and erected makeshift gallows at the Capitol after Trump pressured him to reject the 2020 election results-something Pence said he lacked the authority to do. "I mean, it's deeply offensive to me that you could have a fund that could even possibly compensate people who assaulted police officers or vandalized the Capitol on January 6th," he added on Sunday. "And I think that's broadly held by most Republicans and most Americans."
- Senator Mitch McConnell: Delivered some of the harshest criticism, calling the idea of compensating January 6 rioters "utterly stupid" and "morally wrong."
- Senate Majority Leader John Thune: Stated he is "not a big fan" and does not see a clear purpose for it, while indicating lawmakers want a full review.
- Senator Thom Tillis: Described it as a "payout pot for punks" and urged colleagues to oppose it, warning the idea could be politically damaging ahead of the midterm elections.
- Senator Bill Cassidy: Called the proposal a "slush fund…without a legal precedent."
- Senator John Curtis: Warned about the executive branch distributing money without proper judicial oversight.
- Representative Brian Fitzpatrick: Representing a Pennsylvania swing district, Fitzpatrick has taken a leading role in the House opposition by introducing bipartisan legislation aimed at blocking the fund and pledging to try to kill it.
- Representative Don Bacon: Similarly questioned the arrangement, calling it "inappropriate" and criticizing the optics of negotiating over taxpayer dollars in such a way.
Republicans Expressing Serious Concern / Skepticism
While they have stopped short of full opposition, other lawmakers are actively questioning the fund:
- Senator Joni Ernst: Demanded more transparency regarding the fund’s financial structure.
- Senator John Hoeven: Suggested the plan could face significant legal challenges.
Democratic Opposition and White House Response
Democrats have also strongly opposed the fund, arguing it represents an abuse of executive power and could result in taxpayer money being directed toward politically aligned individuals, including some involved in the riot.
Lawmakers have introduced legislative efforts aimed at blocking the fund entirely or restricting how the money can be distributed. Notably, California Governor Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, said Wednesday that the state would seek to impose a 100 percent tax on payouts distributed from the fund.
The Trump administration has pushed back against both Republican and Democratic criticism. Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche has defended the initiative as a way to compensate Americans who were allegedly targeted by a "weaponized" government, asserting the fund is part of a lawful settlement process. Administration officials have also argued the program will be administered through a structured claims process and that payments will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis.
GOP Representative Byron Donalds defended the proposal, arguing it was meant to help people who were unfairly targeted by the government.
Who Wants the Money?
Several prominent Trump supporters have said they will be applying for compensation through the fund.
Among them is MyPillow CEO Mike Lindell, a leading advocate of Trump's unfounded claim that the 2020 election was stolen. He plans to pursue compensation through the fund, arguing that his company lost $400 million because of perceived government weaponization.
Enrique Tarrio, the former Proud Boys leader who was sentenced to 22 years for “seditious conspiracy” in relation to January 6 -but pardoned by Trump last year-plans to apply and told Reuters his claim could be worth between $2 million and $5 million.
Mark McCloskey, who gained notoriety after he and his wife pointed guns at demonstrators outside their St. Louis, Missouri, home in 2020, said he was waiting for details on how to apply. “Everybody’s very excited about it,” he said, according to The Washington Post. “It’s the first ray of light we’ve seen in a long time.”
Michael Cohen, a former Trump attorney who served prison time, said he plans to apply for the fund and told CBS News: “I am working through the process on my own and will submit the letter directly to the DOJ once completed.”
What Happens Next
Republican leaders are expected to revisit the issue in the weeks ahead. At the same time, legal challenges and continued political pressure from both parties could shape whether the fund moves forward as currently structured or is significantly altered before implementation.
On Friday, a federal judge temporarily blocked the Trump administration from proceeding with the fund. This injunction sets up a June 12 federal court hearing to determine whether the temporary block should remain in place as broader legal and political challenges continue to mount.
2026 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.
This story was originally published May 31, 2026 at 2:56 PM.