People who assaulted police should not get one dime of taxpayer money
In a rare act of public dissent, former Vice President Mike Pence has called on the Trump administration to abandon a federal compensation fund that could direct taxpayer money toward individuals who stormed the Capitol on January 6th. The fund, born from a presidential lawsuit against the IRS, was designed to address claims of legal system weaponization — but its potential reach has exposed a quiet fracture within the Republican Party. Pence, who was himself a target of that day's violence, frames his opposition not as political calculation but as a matter of enduring principle: that those who assault officers and desecrate democratic institutions should find no refuge in public funds.
- A federal compensation fund meant to aid those allegedly targeted by weaponized government agencies may instead pay out to individuals convicted of attacking Capitol Police on January 6th.
- Pence's public rebuke signals that the fund has cracked open a genuine rift inside the GOP — one that Senate Republicans were forced to confront behind closed doors earlier this month.
- A federal judge has already moved to block the fund's implementation, and legal challenges continue to mount even as the DOJ insists its position will hold.
- Pence is urging the administration to drop the fund entirely, drawing a firm line between legitimate DOJ settlements for rights violations and what he sees as an unconscionable blanket payout.
- Beyond the fund itself, Pence warned against what he views as a coordinated effort to rewrite the historical record of January 6th — expressing confidence that such revisionism will ultimately fail.
Mike Pence broke publicly with the Trump administration on Sunday, demanding the immediate abandonment of a new federal fund that could compensate individuals who claim the legal system has been weaponized against them. The former vice president's opposition marks one of the most visible Republican fractures over a policy that has quietly unsettled the party since its creation.
The fund emerged from a settlement of a lawsuit Trump filed against the IRS, with the stated purpose of reimbursing those unfairly targeted by federal agencies. But its implications quickly became explosive: some of those charged in connection with the January 6th Capitol attack have signaled their intent to file claims. For Pence — who was himself a target of the mob that day — the prospect was not a matter of policy nuance. "People that assaulted police officers on Jan. 6 should not get one dime of taxpayer money," he said, calling the idea "totally unacceptable."
The controversy has already forced Senate Republican leaders to address the issue in closed-door meetings, competing for attention alongside other pressing party priorities. Pence said he has been encouraged by the number of GOP senators who have spoken out, and expressed hope that the administration would drop the fund entirely.
He was careful to distinguish the fund from what he considers legitimate legal remedies — supporting the Justice Department's existing authority to settle genuine rights violation cases through proper channels, while rejecting any blanket compensation program. A federal judge temporarily blocked the fund's implementation on Friday, and its fate now rests with the courts and with whether mounting political pressure prompts the administration to reverse course.
Pence also addressed the wider question of historical memory, saying he was "offended" by what he described as efforts to blame Capitol Police for the riot. He expressed confidence that the true record of January 6th — and of those who returned to fulfill their constitutional duty — would ultimately endure.
Mike Pence broke ranks with the Trump administration on Sunday, calling for the immediate abandonment of a new federal fund designed to compensate people who claim the legal system has been weaponized against them. The former vice president's public opposition marks a rare moment of visible Republican fracture over a policy that has quietly divided the party since its creation.
The fund emerged from a settlement of a lawsuit President Trump filed against the IRS. Its stated purpose is straightforward: provide taxpayer money to individuals who assert they have been unfairly targeted by federal agencies. But its practical implications have proven far more contentious. Some of Trump's closest allies—including people charged in connection with the January 6 Capitol attack—have indicated they intend to file claims seeking compensation. The prospect that rioters could receive federal payouts has alarmed even some Republicans who otherwise support the administration.
Pence, who was himself a target of the mob that day, did not mince words. "The idea of creating a fund that could compensate people who assaulted police officers and vandalized the Capitol that day is totally unacceptable," he said. He went further, stating flatly that "people that assaulted police officers on Jan. 6, and vandalized our Capitol should not get one dime of taxpayer money from that fund or anywhere else." His language was unambiguous: this is not a matter of policy disagreement but of principle.
The fund has already become a source of tension within Senate Republican ranks. GOP leaders were forced to address the issue during a closed-door meeting earlier this month, and the controversy has competed for attention alongside other pressing matters like immigration enforcement. Pence said he has been encouraged by the number of Senate Republicans who have publicly objected to the fund's existence. "My hope is the administration will drop it, drop the idea entirely," he said.
Pence distinguished between the fund and what he views as legitimate legal remedies. He said the Justice Department should continue to settle cases where individuals have genuinely had their rights violated—but through proper legal channels, not through a blanket compensation program. "I welcome that settlement greatly," he said of the DOJ's existing authority to address rights violations case by case.
A federal judge temporarily blocked the Justice Department from moving forward with the fund's implementation on Friday, though the DOJ has expressed confidence in its legal standing despite multiple challenges. The fund's ultimate fate now rests with the courts and, potentially, with whether the administration chooses to abandon it under political pressure.
Pence also addressed the broader question of how the Capitol attack is being remembered. He expressed concern that the administration is attempting to rewrite the historical record of January 6, saying he was "offended" when he saw what he characterized as an effort to blame Capitol Police for the riot. He expressed confidence that history would ultimately vindicate those who returned to the Capitol after police secured it and fulfilled their constitutional duty. "There's clearly been an effort by some to rewrite that history, but I don't expect it'll work," he said.
Citas Notables
The idea of creating a fund that could compensate people who assaulted police officers and vandalized the Capitol that day is totally unacceptable.— Mike Pence
My hope is the administration will drop it, drop the idea entirely.— Mike Pence
La Conversación del Hearth Otra perspectiva de la historia
Why would the Trump administration create a fund that could potentially pay people who attacked the Capitol? That seems politically obvious to avoid.
The fund wasn't explicitly designed for that. It was framed as compensation for anyone claiming the legal system weaponized them—a broader grievance that resonates with Trump's base. But once it existed, the door was open.
And Trump allies actually said they'd apply?
Yes. Some of the people charged for January 6 involvement have publicly stated they plan to file claims. That's when the political problem became impossible to ignore, even for Republicans.
So Pence is breaking with Trump over this?
He's breaking with the policy, not necessarily the man. But it's a public break, which is rare for him. He's drawing a line at compensating people who assaulted police.
Does the administration have to listen to him?
Not legally. But Pence still carries weight with Senate Republicans, and several have already objected. If enough GOP senators oppose it, the political cost rises.
What happens now?
A judge has blocked it temporarily. The courts will decide if it's legal. But Pence's statement adds pressure—it signals that even Trump loyalists think this particular idea has gone too far.
Is he defending January 6 itself, or just the police?
He's defending the constitutional duty Congress performed that day. He's also pushing back against what he sees as attempts to rewrite what happened. For him, those are connected.