Trump's DOJ 'playing chicken' with judges — and it could backfire spectacularly: expert

The Trump Department of Justice seems to be engaged in a game of "chicken" with some federal judges, and one former federal prosecutor argued on Tuesday that it would blow up in the department's face.

Last week, Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche told Congress that the Trump administration's $1.776 billion so-called "anti-weaponization" fund is not moving forward. But the administration seems to be suggesting to federal judges that they could still implement the fund, which was created as part of a settlement between President Donald Trump and the IRS over a 2019 case involving his leaked tax returns.

Harry Litman, a former federal prosecutor, argued in a new Substack essay that the federal judges are likely to win the game of chicken, and that position could blow up in the DOJ's face.

"The DOJ’s position is headed directly into a buzzsaw in both Brinkema’s and Williams's courts," Litman wrote. "The Justice Department’s audacity does not match the strength of its position. And in both courts, the judges have every reason—and ample authority—to push back."

For instance, Litman argued that Judge Leonie Brinkema in the Eastern District of Virginia and Judge Kathleen Williams in the Southern District of Florida, both of whom are overseeing pieces of the Trump administration's efforts to establish the weaponization fund, could force Blanche to put something in writing saying the fund is dead. That could put Blanche, who was recently nominated for Attorney General, squarely at odds with Trump, Litman argued.

"Blanche is trying to shoehorn it into the settlement agreement itself, notwithstanding that it was added as a freestanding order after the fact. If that’s the argument, then the multiple flaws in the agreement come storming back," Litman wrote.

"But the alternative position—that the amnesty provision is not a part of the settlement agreement—is even worse," he added. "It means that Blanche has, on his own authority, just gifted Trump, the boss that he loves, with $100 million or more of taxpayer-funded immunity. It would be the most brazen act of executive branch self-dealing in the nation’s history."