AdvertisementSKIP ADVERTISEMENTYou have a preview view of this article while we are checking your access. When we have confirmed access, the full article content will load.The fund that could offer payouts to Trump allies who accuse the government of mistreatment is not only highly unusual but also appears to violate the administration’s own policies.Listen · 8:59 min On Pam Bondi’s first day as attorney general in February 2025, she signed a directive that appeared to prohibit the kind of fund the Trump administration established this week.Credit...Eric Lee/The New York TimesMay 20, 2026The $1.8 billion fund created by the Trump administration this week to pay people who claim mistreatment by the federal government appears to violate longstanding Justice Department standards and practices, as well as a policy directive issued by the administration last year, legal experts said on Wednesday.Todd Blanche, the acting attorney general, defended the fund at a Senate hearing on Tuesday, calling it “unusual” but insisting it was appropriate and reflective of past settlements.Justice Department veterans have been deeply skeptical of those claims, particularly when it comes to a provision in the deal that offers President Trump, his sons Eric and Donald Trump Jr., and the Trump Organization immunity from tax penalties. They have also been critical of the decision to resolve a lawsuit filed by one group of people in a way that gives more than a billion dollars to an entirely different category of people.“I have never heard of the department ever being willing to grant blanket immunity,” said Jennifer Ricketts, a former branch director in the department’s civil division. “That seems blatantly corrupt. It’s a shocking gift to the president.”Justice Department veterans also said the new fund appeared to contradict a specific policy instituted by the Trump administration last year under former Attorney General Pam Bondi that largely prohibited payments to groups not involved in an underlying lawsuit. A Justice Department spokeswoman did not respond to a request for comment.The deal struck between the president’s lawyers and his own administration, without oversight of a judge, could involve major payouts to people who had not sued the government, as well.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe.AdvertisementSKIP ADVERTISEMENT