Staff ReportsThe Justice Department quietly shelved its $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization” fund after conservatives raised alarms — and now it is looking for other legal ways to compensate people who say they were politically targeted. Senate Republicans, led by Sen. Lindsey Graham, are pointing to the Federal Tort Claims Act as an old but usable path. The move matters because it shows the Biden Justice Department is trying to have its cake and eat it too: avoid a big public payout while still solving a political problem behind closed doors.
DOJ backs off the big fund but keeps its options open
The original payout idea came as part of a settlement tied to President Trump’s lawsuit over the IRS leak by contractor Charles Littlejohn. Republicans called the fund a potential slush fund that could reward political allies instead of delivering fair justice. After the public pushback, the DOJ quietly said it has the authority and the money to settle claims without a special fund. That may sound like bureaucratic wordplay — and it is. The department wants to solve the problem without the glare of publicity or clear rules about who gets paid and why.
The Federal Tort Claims Act: an old law, a new use
Sen. Lindsey Graham suggested using the Federal Tort Claims Act, an 80-year-old law that lets people sue the federal government for damages. The FTCA requires real proof and individual lawsuits, not blank-check settlements. That’s a good thing. If the DOJ really cares about justice, it should favor court-based claims where judges decide instead of secret deals where powerful people decide. Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward reportedly replied “on it” to Graham’s suggestion — then deleted the comment. That deletion should make watchdogs nervous, not comforted.
Why conservatives should pay attention
Conservatives won a small fight by forcing the DOJ to drop the flashy fund idea. But the department’s new plan to quietly settle claims still leaves a major problem: who controls the rules? Settlements negotiated behind closed doors can allow political favoritism to sneak back in. Republicans should push for transparency, strict criteria, and congressional oversight if the DOJ is going to use taxpayer money to resolve political weaponization claims. No more secret payouts dressed up as “settlements.”
In the end, the FTCA route is better than a multimillion-dollar pot handed out at the whim of political appointees. Still, it won’t fix the larger issue: the politicization of law enforcement that started this mess. If Republicans want real reform, they should insist on clearer laws and tougher oversight so that the next time someone accuses the government of weaponizing power, there’s a visible, fair process — not another backroom deal. Keep watching; the DOJ may say it’s fixing things, but the details will tell the real story.
