Anti-weaponization fund dropped; protesters charged under Civil War law

People who alleged unfair targeting by the federal government lost their only formal compensation mechanism when attorney general nominee Todd Blanche rescinded the $1.8 billion "anti-weaponization fund," according to NPR. The move came the night before Blanche's Senate confirmation hearing, as the chamber returns today for its final session before a recess until mid-September. The fund had been established through a settlement in a lawsuit Trump filed against the IRS over leaked tax returns. 🔹 What happened: Republican Senators John Cornyn and Thom Tillis had withheld their support for Blanche's confirmation because of their opposition to the fund. A formal rescission letter released overnight cleared their path to a yes vote. Separately, Trump announced on social media that the U.S. and Israel were ready to strike Iranian energy infrastructure over the weekend, but that allies persuaded him to stand down. He described "the perimeters of a deal" that would include the immediate opening of the Strait of Hormuz and the elimination of Iran's nuclear threat. An NPR review of court records found that since 2025 the Department of Justice has charged more than three dozen people under a Civil War-era statute — all connected to protests against federal immigration enforcement. Before 2025, the same statute was used primarily in connection with the January 6 Capitol riot. 🔹 Why it matters: The rescission leaves those who claimed federal mistreatment without recourse. The expanded use of a Civil War-era conspiracy statute against immigration protesters — more than three dozen cases in under two years — represents a documented shift in how the Justice Department classifies protest activity. Workers, community members, and individuals who demonstrated against immigration enforcement actions are now subject to charges once reserved for participants in an attack on Congress. Capital One's court filing also revealed that it closed roughly 385 accounts tied to the Trump Organization following an internal anti-money-laundering review in mid-2021. 📌 EPM Take: The fund's rescission and the surge in Civil War-era charges against immigration protesters are happening in the same week — and that proximity matters. One instrument of accountability is eliminated; another instrument of prosecution is expanded. More than three dozen people now face charges under a statute previously associated with insurrection, for protesting immigration policy. EPM has covered the broad American opposition to an Iran war; what fewer outlets are tracking is the quieter domestic pressure campaign against those who publicly oppose immigration enforcement. The question readers should be asking is whether the legal architecture being built around immigration protest will remain confined to that issue — or whether the Civil War statute, once stretched, stays stretched.