In her appearance before the House Appropriations Committee on June 2, acting Attorney General Todd Blanche delivered an unexpected admission to Democratic Rep. Grace Meng, confirming that the Department of Justice is stepping away from President Donald Trump’s controversial $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization” fund, and that it will not be revived.
Major outlets promptly declared the fund dead. Yet a closer reading of Blanche’s remarks — including what he did and did not say — reveals a far different picture.
Meng began by interrogating Blanche about the fund’s future, noting that the DOJ had agreed to pause the effort only through June 12 and asking bluntly what would come next.
Blanche’s answer came without hesitation and with clarity.
“We are not moving forward with the fund, period.”
Meng did not concede defeat there. The seven-term New York congresswoman pressed to confirm whether “not moving forward” equated to a permanent stance.
“Not moving forward, ever?” she pressed.
“Correct,” Blanche replied.
Yet what Blanche never stated was that he had consistently refused to commit anything to writing. That omission could be pivotal.
‘Fight Back!’: JD Vance Convinced Hundreds of Employers to Do Trump’s Dirty Work and Crush Free Speech — Now the Courts Are Making Every Single One of Them Pay
‘You’ve Got to Be Kidding’: Trump Was Glowing Over Reflecting Pool Reveal —Then Came the Filthy Secret Money Shuffle He Thought Nobody Would Ever Find
The agreement that established the fund explicitly states that it “may be modified only with the written agreement of the Parties,” according to Popular Information.
Without a written reversal, Blanche’s verbal assurances carry whatever weight Trump decides to assign to them, which, as it happens, may be minimal.
Meng pressed Blanche directly on this point, asking whether he and Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward would agree to place the reversal in formal writing, noting that the public statement his office released the day prior seemed to address only the pause through June 12, not a permanent abandonment of the fund.
“I don’t know if there are other ways that you could use another vehicle to move forward with a similar fund or similar intention,” she said. “We’ve heard from both Republicans and Democrats, constituents and Americans across the country about this fund, and I think they would love to be reassured that this fund will not progress.”
Blanche also made it clear that the administration had no plan to abandon its legal defense of the fund, stating that the DOJ would be “defending our rights and making sure our rights are protected” in ongoing litigation in both the Eastern District of Virginia and the Southern District of Florida. In other words, the administration intends to continue fighting for the fund in court while telling Congress it’s gone.
When Meng pressed again for written confirmation, Blanche offered a response that was at once pragmatic and revealing.
“I think there’ll be a transcript to what I say here,” he said. “So that will be in writing.”
Meng accepted that, albeit barely, and made clear the committee would not let the matter drop.
“We will work with you and hold you to it.”
What Blanche did not mention and what the transcript would not capture is that Trump himself had already signaled that the fund is far from dead.
In a podcast interview recorded the same day as Blanche’s testimony, Trump was asked directly whether the fund had been dropped.
“No, a court ruled against it,” Trump responded, defending the fund and arguing that the individuals who stood to benefit “should be reimbursed for a crooked government.”
With what remained of her time, Meng shifted to a different, yet no less urgent, concern: the administration’s proposed budget quietly erasing the three largest federal sources of support for hate-crime prevention and response, including the Jabara-Heyer NO HATE Act, the Shepard-Byrd Hate Crimes Prevention program, and community-based grants long relied upon by local law enforcement.
“Why are we proposing to eliminate the very programs that are helping our law enforcement and targeted communities?” she asked.
Blanche pointed to a broader $12 billion request for violent-crime grants, suggesting there was overlap that could cover the shortfall but struggled to name particular programs when Meng pressed for specifics.
“I’m happy to have my team work with you to make sure that we’re getting money where it needs to be,” he said.
Meng made it clear she would take him up on that pledge, ending with a pointed reminder that combating hate crimes involves more than prosecution.
“It’s also about prevention and collaboration with community organizations,” she said. “I would love to continue to work together on this issue.”
Blanche agreed. Whether that agreement will endure — just as his pledge about the fund did not — remains to be seen.
Watch full clip of Blanche and Meng on YouTube.
