WASHINGTON — Just because the Justice Department is “not moving forward” with its “Anti-Weaponization Fund,” as acting Attorney General Todd Blanche announced Tuesday, doesn’t mean Jan. 6 rioters won’t be getting payouts from the federal government.
The idea of paying Capitol riot defendants long predates last month’s announcement that the Department of Justice was setting up a $1.8 billion slush fund largely for that purpose. And the push for payback continues.
“Mark my words: We will be compensated for the way we were treated and the injustices we dealt with,” Thomas Smith, who spent two years in prison after being convicted of assaulting police and other charges, told HuffPost.
Smith is one of hundreds of Jan. 6 defendants who filed administrative claims for damages under the Federal Tort Claims Act. Already, the Trump administration agreed to pay the family of rioter Ashli Babbitt nearly $5 million over her killing by a Capitol Police officer as she breached an inner door inside the Capitol.
The Justice Department last month announced what it called a “settlement” with President Donald Trump, who’d sued his own government this year in his personal capacity over a past leak of his tax information. The settlement, which created the payout fund and freed the president and his family from all past tax liabilities, was not approved by a judge, and prompted fierce blowback even from some of the president’s allies on Capitol Hill. The agreement specified that a “claimant who already has a claim pending in court or administrative proceedings may be eligible for relief.”
Peter Ticktin, a Florida attorney who represents hundreds of people convicted of Jan. 6-related crimes, said his clients were disappointed to see the White House back away from supporting the fund. He argued it could have been a more “efficient” way to resolve their claims than litigating in federal court, which is what they plan to do now.
“I’d like to see the fund come about again — I think it needs to — but in the meantime, we’re just going to go the old-fashioned route,” Ticktin told HuffPost.
Last week, Ticktin filed a complaint on behalf of nine Jan. 6 clients, arguing that each has “suffered and continues to suffer damage in excess of $1 million,” citing lost wages, medical expenses, “severe emotional distress” and “reputational harm.” The lawsuit maintains the Jan. 6 riot was stirred up by “agitators” who have been protected by former Attorney General Merrick Garland and former FBI Director Christopher Wray.
One of the plaintiffs in that case, John George Todd III, a Marine veteran, was sentenced to five years in prison after being convicted of injuring a police officer’s hand during the riot. He was later pardoned by Trump.
Ticktin said he would continue to bring a series of lawsuits, and that he would seek no less than $1 million for each of his clients.
In response to a social media post by Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) calling for a new weaponization fund based on tort claims, Associate Attorney General Stanley Woodward, the third-highest-ranking official in the Justice Department, suggested on Tuesday that the department would do what Graham wanted.
“We’re on it,” Woodward wrote in a post that has since been deleted.
The Justice Department did not respond to requests for comment.
Mark McCloskey, another attorney who has been filing claims on behalf of Jan. 6 defendants, said the $1.8 billion fund might not have been enough money anyway. He had advocated for a special commission like the one Blanche planned to set up, but he also filed Federal Tort Claims Act cases that could proceed on their own.
“We’ve always hoped that there would be a voluntary payment system,” McCloskey told HuffPost. “All those cases will move forward if we need to.”
The Trump administration backed off the slush fund partly because of strong pushback from Republicans in Congress. Rioters receiving payouts anyway would likely be an unsavory prospect for some Republican lawmakers, but Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) said it would still be better than going through the made-up system envisioned by Trump’s faux settlement with his own government.
“That’s the way to go, on a case-by-case basis with a judge sifting through the evidence, not some executive branch thing that could be manipulated,” Cornyn told HuffPost.
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) said Congress should pass a law banning Trump’s slush fund. He said he didn’t have a problem with people seeking damages through the Federal Tort Claims Act (as Ashli Babbitt’s family did).
“We need to trust our institutions and not just kind of tilt it so we get the outcome we want. We should be institution-focused, not outcome-focused,” Cassidy told HuffPost.
Smith, whose nine-year prison sentence was cut short by Trump’s pardon, said he was originally represented by McCloskey, but is now pursuing his claim with Ticktin.
“I understand people’s concern with somebody getting paid if they were legitimately assaulting a police officer, but the narrative is going to shift at some point,” he said. “People are going to see why people acted the way they did that day. They’re going to see the police using brutality against people that was not necessary.”