Two police officers who risked their lives defending the US Capitol on January 6, 2021, have filed a federal lawsuit in Washington, DC, seeking to block the disbursement of $1.8 billion from what the Trump administration calls the "Anti-Weaponization Fund." The suit, filed on May 20, 2026, was brought by Harry Dunn, a former US Capitol Police officer, and Daniel Hodges of the Metropolitan Police Department, both of whom were on duty during the violent breach of the Capitol building.
The Anti-Weaponization Fund was established as part of a broader settlement after former President Donald Trump sued the federal government for $10 billion over the unauthorized leak of his tax records by the Internal Revenue Service. The $1.8 billion fund is intended to compensate individuals whom the Trump administration says were targeted by what it describes as a "weaponized" justice system during the Biden presidency. Critics note that the primary beneficiaries would be people who were prosecuted in connection with the January 6 Capitol riot.
At the heart of the legal challenge is the 14th Amendment to the US Constitution. The officers argue that Section 4 of the amendment explicitly prohibits the United States from assuming or paying any debt or obligation incurred in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the federal government. By directing taxpayer money to individuals convicted or charged for their roles in the January 6 attack, the plaintiffs contend that the fund directly violates this constitutional provision, which was originally adopted after the Civil War to prevent the government from compensating Confederate sympathizers.
The January 6 Capitol riot took place as Congress met to certify the results of the 2020 presidential election. Supporters of Trump stormed the building in an effort to prevent the certification of Joe Biden's victory, resulting in widespread destruction, injuries to more than 140 police officers, and several deaths in the days surrounding the event. Hundreds of participants were subsequently arrested and prosecuted on charges ranging from trespassing to seditious conspiracy. Both Dunn and Hodges sustained injuries during the attack and have spoken publicly about the physical and psychological toll the day took on them and their colleagues.
The Trump administration has framed the fund as a matter of justice for people it believes were unfairly targeted by federal prosecutors under the previous administration. Officials have argued that many January 6 defendants received disproportionate sentences and that the prosecutions were politically motivated. The lawsuit filed by Dunn and Hodges represents a direct constitutional challenge to that position, and the case is expected to draw significant attention as it moves through the US District Court in Washington. Legal analysts say the outcome could set an important precedent regarding the scope of the 14th Amendment's restrictions on government expenditures related to insurrection.