U.S. President Donald Trump looks on during a meeting with Chinese President Xi Jinping (not pictured) on the sidelines of a visit to Zhongnanhai Garden on May 15, 2026, in Beijing, China. Trump and other U.S. officials are finishing up a visit intended to address the Iran conflict, trade imbalances, and the Taiwan situation while establishing new bilateral boards for economic and AI oversight. (Photo by Evan Vucci-Pool/Getty Images)
(WASHINGTON) — The Trump administration’s $1.8 billion compensation fund to pay those who claim they were targeted by the Biden administration is now at the center of three federal lawsuits.
The nonprofit watchdog group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington on Friday asked a federal judge to halt the creation of the fund, calling it “a jaw-dropping act of presidential corruption.”
Earlier Friday, a coalition of nonprofits and individuals, including a former Jan. 6 prosecutor, filed a complaint in the Eastern District of Virginia, alleging that the creation of the fund bypassed Congress’ authority over federal spending and violated the 14th Amendment’s prohibition on using federal funds “in aid of insurrection or rebellion against the United States.”
“Created following a collusive agreement between the President and his own administration, this Fund has no congressional authorization, no basis in law, and no accountability,” the lawsuit said.
The CREW lawsuit attempts to establish legal standing by focusing on the purported secrecy of the fund, which it says is in “defiance of federal records preservation and access laws.”
The new suit comes two days after former Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn and Metropolitan Police Department Officer Daniel Hodges, who both defended the U.S. Capitol in 2021 during the Jan. 6 attack, filed a similar lawsuit in D.C. asking a judge to halt the creation and funding of the controversial fund.
The lawsuit filed early Friday was brought by a former federal prosecutor who brought Jan. 6 cases, a law professor who was acquitted after being charged for his actions during an immigration raid, the National Abortion Federation, the nonprofit Common Cause, and the City of New Haven, Connecticut.
“Since its inception, this fund has been on a collision course with the United States Constitution,” the lawsuit said.
The Department of Justice’s launch of the “Anti-Weaponization Fund” — in exchange for President dropping his $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS and two other civil claims — has sparked accusations of “collusive litigation” and a bipartisan uproar over the possible use of taxpayer money to pay rioters who attacked the Capitol on Jan. 6.
While Trump previously said he was not involved in the creation of the fund, he took to social media on Friday to defend the use of taxpayer money in that manner.
“I gave up a lot of money in allowing the just announced Anti-Weaponization Fund to go forward. I could have settled my case, including the illegal release of my Tax Returns and the equally illegal BREAK IN of Mar-a-Lago, for an absolute fortune. Instead, I am helping others, who were so badly abused by an evil, corrupt, and weaponized Biden Administration, receive, at long last, JUSTICE!” Trump wrote.
Friday’s lawsuit is also alleging that the use of the federal Judgment Fund — an unlimited appropriation used by the federal government to pay court judgments and settlements — to create the “Anti-Weaponization Fund” is an unlawful end-run around Congress’ authority to appropriate money.
The lawsuits precede the establishment of the fund itself, which, according to the settlement agreement between Trump and the DOJ, is to be created by Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche within 30 days. As part of the arrangement, Blanche is to appoint a five-commissioner committee to oversee claims.
Some legal experts have raised concerns about the viability of the lawsuits and if the plaintiffs bringing the cases — including officers who defended the Capitol and a broad coalition of affected parties — will be able to establish legal standing for the case to proceed.
ABC News Legal Contributor James Sample noted that the case filed earlier this week might struggle to establish that the two officers have been directly injured by the proposed creation of the fund.
“There’s no question that they’ve been subjected to threats and harassment, and who knows what else from a security perspective, for the manner in which they’ve spoken out about Jan. 6 since then,” Sample said — but added that “all of those are past injuries that are not fairly traceable to the judgment fund.”
A Beechcraft C90 King Air (Marko Hannula/Getty Images)
(RUIDOSO, N.M.) — A small medical plane with four people on board crashed near Ruidoso, New Mexico, early Thursday, according to the Federal Aviation Administration.
The Beechcraft King Air 90 had departed from Roswell Air Center and was headed to Sierra Blanca Regional Airport when it crashed around 4 a.m. local time, the FAA said. The crash was in a remote, wooded area, according to FlightRadar24.
Jason Burns, the manager of Lincoln County, where the Sierra Blanca Regional Airport is located, said a fire was reported in the nearby Capitan Mountain area. Burns said emergency personnel, fire officials, law enforcement and other agencies were responding.
The National Transportation Safety Board and FAA will investigate, the FAA said.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
Marimar Martinez, a Chicago teacher’s assistant who survived being shot five times by a U.S. Border Patrol agent in October 2025, attends a press conference with her lawyers at the law offices of Cheronis & Parente LLC and Gallagher & Kosner Law LLC on February 11, 2026, in Chicago, Illinois, United States. (Jacek Boczarski/Anadolu via Getty Images)
(CHICAGO) — Last October, the Department of Homeland Security claimed that federal agents in Chicago were “forced to deploy their weapons and fire defensive shots at an armed US citizen” after their SUV was “rammed by vehicles and boxed in by 10 cars.”
But analysis of recently released body-camera footage of the shooting of Marimar Martinez and videos verified by nearby businesses and bystanders suggests that those claims were exaggerated — and that federal agents, knowing their actions were being recorded, appeared to coordinate with one another to explain their conduct that day.
Body camera footage and other evidence was released Tuesday after a federal judge last week granted a motion to permit the public release of the materials in the case.
The video shows that in the minute before the shooting, agents were being followed by two, not 10 vehicles. Agents stated they were “boxed in,” but at no time was their vehicle blocked from the front.
At no point in footage from an agent’s body-worn camera or from multiple surveillance cameras is a driver seen ramming the agents’ vehicle; instead, the video shows an agent appearing to steer toward the vehicle driven by Martinez, crashing into her, and then rapidly firing toward her.
Martinez, a U.S. citizen and teacher’s assistant, was shot five times during the incident. She’s now planning to sue DHS and the agent for allegedly making false claims about her following the shooting and labeling her a domestic terrorist.
While prosecutors originally alleged that Martinez “aggressively and erratically” pursued officers that day, a judge dismissed the criminal case against her with prejudice after a reversal by the Department of Justice, which sought to dismiss the case.
A U.S. Customs and Border Protection spokesperson said in a statement that the officer who shot Martinez was placed on administrative leave following the incident. The statement did not indicate the length of the administrative leave or when it began.
“CBP is committed to the highest standards of conduct, transparency, and accountability. All significant use-of-force incidents are thoroughly investigated, reviewed, and presented to the National Use of Force Review Board (NUFRB), an independent body comprised of senior CBP officials and representatives from DHS and DOJ, including the DOJ Civil Rights Division,” the statement said.
Below is a timeline of the incident based on the body camera footage and bystander video leading up to and after the shooting.
The lead-up 10:27:02 a.m.
Three federal agents are riding in an SUV in the first moments of video from an agent’s body-worn camera. Later, the video will reveal an Uber placard on the front of their SUV. One agent is seen speaking into the voice chat app on a nearby phone.
At the time, the Trump administration had surged federal resources for immigration enforcement in Chicago as part of “Operation Midway Blitz.”
According to a court filing, the agents were part of a protective detail assisting a nearby operation in Oaklawn. An FBI agent originally attested that the officers were being followed by multiple civilian vehicles.
10:28:17 a.m.
The agent’s body camera begins recording audio.
“Camera’s on,” the agent says.
The agent readies an assault rifle. With his finger on the trigger, one of the agents can be heard saying what sounds like either “do something, b—-,” or “hit something, b—-.”
10:28:35 a.m.
Another agent is seen pointing his handgun toward the right of the SUV.
A nearby driver repeatedly honks their horn, prompting one of the officers to remark, “Honk all you want.”
The agents’ vehicle is captured on a security camera on Kedzie Avenue. The SUV is flanked by Martinez, in a gray Nissan Rogue, to the agents’ left.
To their right is a GMC SUV, adorned with a Mexican flag on its hood, driven by Anthony Ruiz. Ahead of them are two cars: a sedan and a red pickup truck.
10:28:47 a.m.
Seconds later, the agent with the active body-worn camera says, “Alright, it’s time to get aggressive, get the f—- out. Because they’re trying to box us in.”
“If she hits us, it’s … ,” another agent can be heard saying.
10:28:57 a.m.
Charles Exum, the driver, appears to be the agent who says, “We’re going to make contact, we’re boxed in … we have got to get [inaudible] out of here. “
“We are boxed in,” the agent with the active body-worn camera repeats.
10:28:58 a.m.
The three vehicles briefly enter the frame of a security camera looking over a gas station parking lot.
Martinez, in the Nissan Rogue, is parallel with the agents to their left. Ruiz is behind them and to their right.
The pickup truck and the sedan, previously observed ahead of the agents’ vehicle, are also observed traveling several car lengths ahead of the agents.
10:29:01 a.m.
Exum appears to turn the car’s wheel to the left. A loud crash is heard, and the agents visibly react.
By this time, the two cars ahead of the agents have driven into the path of another security camera. The cars do not stop and drive out of view.
The shooting 10:29:04 a.m.
The agents’ vehicle comes to a stop. Their vehicle and Ruiz’s are seen stopped at the rightmost edge of the gas station security footage. The view of Martinez’s vehicle is blocked, and we do not see the agents’ vehicle make contact with hers.
Exum is seen holding a handgun in his right hand.
10:29:06 a.m.
“Out of the car,” the driver says, as he exits the car with his handgun drawn.
“Be advised, we’ve been struck, we’ve been struck,” the agent with the body-worn camera says.
A second later, five gunshots can be heard in rapid succession.
The agents’ SUV enters the field of view of another security camera. A drawing of the scene — made by one of the agents during their interview with the FBI, according to Martinez’s lawyers — indicated three vehicles were ahead of the agents’ SUV, but the footage shows that at the moment of the shooting, the agents’ vehicle has an unobstructed path forward.
10:29:09 a.m.
Martinez’s vehicle enters the frame of the security camera. She drives north, away from the scene.
10:29:11 a.m.
The agent with the body-worn camera points his rifle toward Ruiz’s vehicle, as it reverses and crashes into a parked car before turning to the left to drive away. Ruiz is later arrested at a gas station a half block away.
“Don’t you f—— move,” the officer says.
10:29:18 a.m.
As the agent turns around, his body camera shows that the SUV is not being blocked in front of it.
The aftermath 10:32:49 a.m.
Exum’s body-worn camera turns on about three minutes after firing his weapon.
10:39:19 a.m.
Exum tells a responding officer that he fired “five to seven shots” at Martinez.
“I don’t know if I hit her or not,” he says. “I [was] angled at the driver, I got five to seven rounds off at her.”
“It was a woman shooting?” the officer asked.
“No, I was shooting,” Exum said.
10:39:38 a.m.
Exum tells a responding officer that he “did the shooting” after Martinez hit his SUV.
“She already hit my vehicle, we got out to defend, she came forward, and that’s when I opened up on her,” he said. “We did not get shot at; we did the shooting.”
10:45:04 a.m.
As more officers arrive at the scene, Exum and the other agents begin to recount the incident and to ask whether his camera was on.
“We were getting out to defend because they already tried to box us in,” he said. “She was moving forward into me.”
“Camera on or no?” an officer said.
“No, I didn’t have it because we were [inaudible],” he said.
“That’s good, as long as you can justify it, bro,” the officer responds.
10:48:14 a.m.
As Exum prepares to light a cigarette, another officer acknowledges that their conversation is being recorded and advises him to “keep everything out.”
“So she hit you guys … You got boxed in?” an officer asked.
“We [were] getting boxed in, and I had to push left. She came in, she pulled over, stopped. I got out so we could defend,” Exum said.
“Hey, hey, just real quick though, since we’re recording, keep it [inaudible],” another officer says. “Keep everything out, you’re good man.”
10:50:30 a.m.
Another officer tells Exum to “keep [his] mouth shut” about the incident.
“Just so you know, you don’t give statements to anybody,” the officer says. “Absolutely no statements at all … You keep your mouth shut.”
Charles Berry, 66, was arrested in connection with a 1986 homicide in Virginia Beach, Virginia, according to the Newington Police Department in Connecticut. (Newington Police Department via Meta)
(VIRGINIA BEACH, Va.) — Four decades after a young woman was raped and murdered, a man has been linked to the crime through DNA and is under arrest, according to Virginia Beach, Virginia, police.
“It’s incredibly scary for the community to think that someone who would rape and brutally murder someone 40 years ago was out in society,” Virginia Beach Police Chief Paul Neudigate said at a news conference on Wednesday.
On May 15, 1986, the body of 22-year-old Roberta Walls was discovered in a field behind an elementary school, police said.
Walls “was a loving daughter, a big sister, a friend to those who knew her and someone that could be counted on in her circle of friends,” Virginia Beach Police Deputy Chief Jeffery Wilkerson said.
Her murder was investigated for decades, police said.
In 2001, a male DNA profile was developed and it was entered into the national DNA databank, but there was no match, police Capt. Michele Wyatt said.
“During the course of the investigation, the DNA of more than 30 males was compared with the offender’s DNA, and all were eliminated,” Wyatt said.
In 2023, the Virginia Beach Police Department received grant funding that allowed investigators to pursue forensic genealogy leads, Wyatt said.
Police went on to identify a “possible suspect who had strong ties to the area during the relevant time period,” Wyatt said, and a “direct DNA comparison ultimately identified Charles Berry as the source of the DNA profile.”
Investigators discovered that Berry was in the U.S. Navy during the time of the murder and was stationed in the Virginia Beach area, Wyatt said.
It appears Berry did not know Walls before the murder, police said, adding that Berry had never been on the police’s radar.
Berry, 66, of Newington, Connecticut, was arrested on Monday, the Newington Police Department said. He’s charged with rape and capital murder in the commission of a rape, the chief said.
“This breakthrough stands as a powerful testament to the relentless persistence of our detectives, who refused to let Roberta be forgotten,” the Virginia Beach Police Department said in a statement. “We hope this closure brings a measure of peace to the Walls family and sends a clear message: no matter how much time passes, we will never stop searching for the truth.”
Berry is in custody in Connecticut and it is not clear if he has an attorney, according to court records.
