The Trump administration's $1.8 billion compensation fund, established to pay individuals claiming they were targeted by the Biden administration, is now facing a second federal lawsuit. The latest legal challenge was filed on Friday in the Eastern District of Virginia by a coalition of nonprofits and individuals, including a former prosecutor involved in Jan. 6 cases.

The lawsuit contends that the creation of the fund bypassed Congress's constitutional authority over federal spending and violated the 14th Amendment's prohibition against using federal funds to support insurrection or rebellion. According to the complaint, the fund was created through a "collusive agreement" between the President and his administration, lacking any congressional authorization, legal basis, or accountability.

This new legal action follows a similar lawsuit filed two days prior in Washington D.C. by former Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn and Metropolitan Police Department Officer Daniel Hodges. Dunn and Hodges, who defended the U.S. Capitol during the Jan. 6, 2021 attack, are also seeking to halt the fund's creation and funding.

The plaintiffs in the Eastern District of Virginia lawsuit include a former federal prosecutor specializing in Jan. 6 cases, a law professor previously acquitted of charges related to an immigration raid, the National Abortion Federation, the nonprofit Common Cause, and the City of New Haven, Connecticut. The suit asserts that the fund "has been on a collision course with the United States Constitution since its inception."

The Department of Justice's launch of the fund was reportedly part of an agreement where President Trump would drop his $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS and two other civil claims. This arrangement has drawn accusations of collusive litigation and bipartisan criticism due to concerns that taxpayer money could be used to compensate individuals involved in the Jan. 6 Capitol attack.

President Trump addressed the controversy on social media Friday, defending the use of taxpayer funds. He stated that he "gave up a lot of money" by allowing the fund to proceed and could have secured a substantial settlement for his cases, including issues related to the release of his tax returns and a "break-in" at Mar-a-Lago. He asserted his intention was to help those he believes were "so badly abused by an evil, corrupt, and weaponized Biden Administration" to receive justice.

Friday's lawsuit also challenges the use of the federal Judgment Fund, an appropriation that covers court judgments and settlements, to establish the 'Anti-Weaponization Fund.' Plaintiffs argue this constitutes an unlawful circumvention of Congress's power to allocate federal money.

The controversy highlights ongoing legal and political battles surrounding the use of federal resources and the interpretations of presidential authority and congressional oversight.