Blue-state leaders are openly plotting a 100% tax on Trump’s controversial $1.8 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” turning a federal payout program into the latest battleground over who really runs the country’s justice system and wallet.
Story Snapshot
- Democratic officials in multiple blue states are drafting laws to tax every dollar residents receive from the Department of Justice “Anti-Weaponization Fund.”[1][2][4]
- Backers say the goal is to stop constituents from being “enriched” by what they call a partisan slush fund tied to Trump and January 6 defendants.[1][2][4]
- The Justice Department describes the $1.776 billion fund as a settlement-based program to compensate people for government “weaponization and lawfare,” not a political giveaway.[5][6]
- The clash highlights how both parties now use complex legal and tax maneuvers, rather than straight-up legislation, to reward allies, punish enemies, and bypass normal democratic accountability.[1][2][5]
What the blue-state 100% tax proposals would actually do
Democratic governors and legislators in states like California, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, and Wisconsin are advancing or drafting measures that would impose a full 100 percent state income tax on any payment residents receive from the federal Anti-Weaponization Fund.[1][2][4] California Governor Gavin Newsom has publicly endorsed the idea, saying it is “an action we look forward to taking,” while lawmakers rush to fold the tax language into state budget bills this session.[1][2][3]
In New York, Assemblymember Alex Bores introduced the “Anti-Insurrectionist Act,” explicitly targeting federal fund recipients.[4] Bores said in a posted video, “If you’re a New Yorker and you take from this illegal slush fund, New York state will tax 100 percent of it… If you stormed the Capitol and you take from this slush fund, too bad, we’re taking it.”[1][4] State Senate Deputy Leader Michael Gianaris filed a matching 100 percent tax bill “so that no resident of this State is enriched” by the payouts.[3][4]
How Trump’s DOJ ‘Anti-Weaponization Fund’ works and why it is so controversial
The Department of Justice (DOJ) created the Anti-Weaponization Fund as part of a settlement in the case President Donald J. Trump v. Internal Revenue Service, in which Trump, his two adult sons, and the Trump Organization dropped a $10 billion lawsuit over leaked tax returns.[5][6] DOJ says the $1.776 billion fund is meant to provide a formal process to hear claims from people who suffered government “weaponization and lawfare,” including the power to issue apologies and monetary relief.[5][6]
The money comes from the federal Judgment Fund, a permanent taxpayer-financed account used to pay legal settlements since the 1950s.[5][6] A five-member volunteer commission, all appointed by the Attorney General, will evaluate claims and can approve payments based on alleged damages, legal costs, time spent in prison, and other factors.[5] Critics warn that the rules are open-ended and that even January 6 rioters convicted of assaulting police could qualify for payouts, a possibility DOJ has not ruled out.[5] Bipartisan opponents describe the fund as a “slush fund” that circumvents Congress and normal appropriations.[2][5]
Why blue states say they must neutralize the fund — and what that signals about the system
Democratic sponsors argue that if the federal government insists on sending money to people they view as political allies of Trump, their states should make sure residents do not profit from it.[1][2][4] New York’s Gianaris said there is “widespread, bipartisan agreement that this is baldfaced corruption at its worst” and that the state can “combat it by ensuring that none of this money benefits anyone in our state’s borders.”[3][4] Supporters frame the 100 percent tax as a moral line in the sand, not a revenue-raising measure.[1][2]
This aggressive tactic—using state tax power to try to nullify a federal payout—fits a growing pattern of states treating each other’s and Washington’s policies as hostile moves to be countered, not compromises to be debated.[1][2] Instead of Congress openly voting to approve or reject the fund, the fight is shifting into technical arenas: settlement structures, judgment accounts, and tax codes.[2][5] For citizens already convinced that “the system” is rigged for insiders, this back-and-forth confirms that the real battles happen far from kitchen-table concerns like wages, prices, and safety.[1][2][5]
What both sides risk — and what it reveals about deep frustration with government
For the Trump administration and its allies, the fund is presented as overdue compensation for people who say they were unfairly targeted by past investigations, from tax cases to January 6 prosecutions.[5][6] For opponents, it looks like a taxpayer-funded reward program for the politically connected, with minimal oversight and decisions concentrated in a small commission appointed by one administration.[2][5] Both views point to the same deeper worry: powerful actors can bend legal tools to serve political ends while ordinary people watch from the sidelines.
The DOJ confirmed Trump’s $1.776B “Anti-Weaponization Fund” is real, funded through a federal settlement over leaked tax returns. Democrats and watchdogs are now scrambling to block or heavily tax payouts. #Trump #GavinNewsom #AntiWeaponizationFund #DOJ pic.twitter.com/SuNqVGBXWh
— Matthew Brady (@mattbrady775) May 28, 2026
For blue-state Democrats, a 100 percent tax sends a message but carries legal and political risks. Courts could decide whether such a targeted surtax is constitutional, whether it improperly punishes a federally created benefit, or whether it essentially weaponizes state tax codes in the same way they accuse DOJ of weaponizing federal power.[1][2][4][6] No matter the outcome, the episode reinforces a bipartisan sense that government increasingly serves the battles of the elite, while families stuck with the bill are left picking sides in a fight they never asked for.[1][2][5][6]
Sources:
[1] Web – Blue states pitch 100% tax on DOJ ‘anti-weaponization’ payouts…
[2] Web – A 100% tax on the DOJ’s “Anti-Weaponization Fund” payouts? NYS …
[3] Web – State Dems race to tax payouts from Trump’s ‘anti-weaponization’ fund
[4] YouTube – Democrats propose 100% tax on Trump’s “Anti-Weaponization” fund
[5] Web – Blue states pitch 100 percent tax on Trump’s ‘anti-weaponization …
[6] YouTube – Democrats Push 100% Tax On Trump’s ‘Anti-Weaponization’ Fund
