By Lindsay Wise, Richard Rubin and Siobhan Hughes

WASHINGTON -- An internal Republican fight over legislation that would officially kill President Trump's $1.8 billion "anti-weaponization" fund heated up Thursday, putting the party's most vulnerable incumbent senators in the spotlight and bringing action on the floor to a halt.

An initial vote related to the fund dragged on for about three hours. The holdup came as Republicans are trying to push a $70 billion immigration-enforcement bill through Congress this week. That effort gives leverage to opponents of the anti-weaponization fund, because Republican leaders need their votes for the bill.

Three Republicans -- Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Dan Sullivan of Alaska and Jon Husted of Ohio -- voted for a Democratic motion to send the entire immigration-enforcement bill back to committee, with instructions to add language that would eliminate the anti-weaponization fund. All three are all in competitive races this year. The motion narrowly failed.

Sen. Bill Cassidy (R., La.) and Sen. Thom Tillis (R., N.C.) are pushing for language to block the fund, and Cassidy has filed amendments to undo the Justice Department's pledge to end tax audits of Trump, his family and his businesses. Tillis, a frequent target of Trump's barbs, isn't running for re-election this year. Cassidy, who voted to convict Trump after the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol, just lost his primary after Trump endorsed a challenger.

Tillis has said he won't support the $70 billion spending bill unless it includes language to kill the fund, and said it was his intuition that there were enough Republicans to insist upon such language. Cassidy was on the floor trying to line up support for his own plan to end the fund, said Sen. Tim Sheehy (R., Mont.).

The objections to the anti-weaponization fund from Democrats and many Republicans center on concerns that taxpayer money would be used to compensate Trump's allies and could reward people who had assaulted police officers during the Jan. 6 riot.

Republican opposition already had forced leaders to remove a $1 billion provision from the immigration-enforcement package that would have funded security-related upgrades linked to the new White House ballroom championed by Trump.

"I've seen it worse," Sen. John Kennedy (R., La.) said when asked about the mood on the Senate floor. "Nobody's stabbed anybody yet."

Senate Republican leaders had hoped that statements from acting Attorney General Todd Blanche disavowing the fund earlier this week would be enough to quell the concerns from lawmakers. But Trump declined Wednesday to confirm that he considered the fund dead -- saying he would have to ask lawyers -- while also praising the fund. The administration can also explore other ways to compensate political allies who say they were harmed by the government.

The impasse came after Senate GOP leaders began a long series of votes Thursday morning. Their aim was to defeat Democratic amendments, pass the bill without changes and get it through the House to Trump's desk as soon as Friday. But any small number of Republican holdouts can derail their plans, given the united opposition from Democrats.

"Anyone who still believes that Trump has any intention of stopping his effort to steal [from] American taxpayers to enrich himself, his family and MAGA loyalists ought to listen to Trump's comments yesterday," said Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D., N.Y.). Schumer said the fund "won't die until we permanently ban it by law, not by language, not by verbal promises, which can just evaporate, but by law."

Congress didn't create the fund, which resulted from Trump's decision to sue the government over the leak of his tax returns and withdraw the suit in exchange for the establishment of the fund. The fund was created in writing -- in an agreement signed by a Trump lawyer, a Justice Department official and the chief executive officer of the Internal Revenue Service. It was styled as the settlement of the suit that Trump filed over the leak of his returns.

Blanche said Tuesday the fund -- which is also being challenged in several lawsuits -- wasn't moving forward, though he didn't say he would put that in writing when pressed during a congressional hearing.

"If Blanche says that this is largely inoperative, why not use this moment to codify that?" Tillis said, warning that failing to do so would expose Republicans in close races to criticism.

Republicans, who control the Senate 53-47, are relying on a fast-track budget procedure to advance the multiyear immigration-enforcement bill with a simple majority rather than the 60 votes usually required in the chamber. That is a path around this year's Democratic attempts to block funding for those agencies -- and to lock in funding in case Democrats win back partial or full control of Congress in November's election.

But the strategy requires Republicans in the Senate to bat down amendments and remain largely united around a final version.

Write to Lindsay Wise at lindsay.wise@wsj.com, Richard Rubin at richard.rubin@wsj.com and Siobhan Hughes at Siobhan.hughes@wsj.com

(END) Dow Jones Newswires

June 04, 2026 14:20 ET (18:20 GMT)

Copyright (c) 2026 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.