President Donald Trump's administration has created a nearly $1.8 billion fund to pay people who say they were victims of government "weaponization," raising questions about whom among his allies and supporters – including those who rioted at the Capitol on Jan. 6 – might get payouts from taxpayers, as well as what kind of influence Trump will wield over the fund.

READ MORE: Blanche faces senators on new Trump 'weaponization' fund, Epstein, budget cuts

The Justice Department's $1.776 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund," a nod to the country's founding year, is part of a settlement with Trump to end a lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service over the leaking of his tax returns, which occurred during his own presidency.

The Trump administration has compared it to a settlement dating back to former President Barack Obama's administration, claiming the U.S. government has "done this in the past."

"This was done during the Obama administration, something almost identical in structure," said acting Attorney General Todd Blanche before a Senate Appropriations subcommittee on Tuesday. "It is true that this is unusual. That is true, but it is not unprecedented."

Legal experts disagree.

"I don't even think we have a word for how unprecedented this is," said Adam Zimmerman, a professor at USC Gould School of Law who has written about past presidential settlements. "This is in a totally different solar system than any past government settlement on record."

Trump has long sought to portray Biden-era criminal investigations into his efforts to overturn the 2020 election as a politically motivated "witch hunt," and has called the violent insurrection of Jan. 6, 2021, "a day of love."

READ MORE: Officers who defended Capitol on Jan. 6 sue to block payouts from $1.8B 'anti-weaponization' fund

Two police officers who defended the Capitol during the insurrection sued the federal government on Wednesday to block the fund, calling it illegal and a "sham."

"In the most brazen act of presidential corruption this century, President Donald J. Trump has created a $1.776 billion taxpayer-funded slush fund to finance the insurrectionists and paramilitary groups that commit violence in his name," the lawsuit alleges.

Government watchdogs and Democratic lawmakers have also blasted the creation of the fund as an act of corruption.

How will the Anti-Weaponization Fund work?

The Anti-Weaponization Fund is set to be administered by five commissioners. Four commissioners will be appointed by the attorney general and the fifth will be appointed in consultation with congressional leadership.

Blanche said he was unsure whether Trump would suggest whom to appoint to the commission. According to the Department of Justice, the president can remove any of the commissioners.

The commissioners will create guidelines, take in information and assess whether claimants were victims of weaponization.

"The commission can do anything according to what was set up yesterday, from issuing an apology to the claimant to awarding monetary compensation," Blanche said.

Anyone, regardless of their political affiliation, is eligible to apply for the fund, Blanche said.

"It's not limited to the Biden weaponization. It's not limited to, in any way, scope or form, to Jan. 6 or to Jack Smith," Blanche said, referencing the Justice Department's former special counsel who conducted investigations into Trump. "There's no limitation on the claims."

READ MORE: Ex-prosecutor charged over handling of sealed Smith report on Trump classified files probe

Blanche said some information related to the claims, such as the basis of the complaint and amount awarded, will be publicly reported.

However, Virginia Canter, chief counsel and director of anti-corruption and ethics at Democracy Defenders Fund, said the settlement does not explicitly require this level of transparency.

During the hearing, senators pushed Blanche to make a rule or encourage commissioners to exclude people convicted of violent crimes or those who assaulted Capitol police officers.

Blanche didn't explicitly agree to that.

The fund will stop processing claims on Dec. 1, 2028, more than a month before Trump is set to leave office.

How does the Anti-Weaponization Fund compare to other government settlements?

The Justice Department has compared the fund to one set up in 2011 under Obama as part of the 1999 Keepseagle v. Vilsack class action lawsuit that alleged the U.S. Department of Agriculture discriminated against Native Americans.

"The analogy that has been drawn to that case is grossly inaccurate," said Joseph Sellers, the lead attorney who represented the Native American plaintiffs in the case.

Following decades of litigation and negotiation to reach a settlement, the Departments of Justice and Agriculture established a $680 million compensation fund for eligible class members. The settlement agreement was approved by the judge presiding over the case.

After the window to make a claim expired, a judge agreed to distribute a remaining sum of $38 million to nonprofit organizations serving Native American farmers and ranchers, and $266 million to create the Native American Agriculture Fund.

In Trump's case, there was no class action lawsuit. Trump and his sons, Donald Trump Jr. and Eric Trump, filed a $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS in January over a government contractor leaking their tax returns. The lawsuit marked the first time a sitting president, under his status as a private citizen, sued his own administration, Zimmerman said.

Unlike in the Keepseagle settlement, the Justice Department's fund will be distributed to a third party unrelated to the case: victims of government "lawfare and weaponization."

Though the Justice Department has said the money won't go to Trump or the other plaintiffs, "the recourse is not to then create a fund that can permit you to disperse them to third parties who have no relationship to the suit whatsoever," Sellers said.

Additionally, unlike in the Keepseagle case, the settlement agreement and the fund will have no judicial overview, Canter said.

The nearly $1.8 billion in taxpayer money used for the fund comes from what's known as the Judgment Fund. Congress continuously appropriates money to the Judgment Fund for the government to pay legal claims filed against it. Funding for the Keapseagle case's settlement also came from the Judgment Fund.

"The Judgment Fund is for lawsuits," Zimmerman said. "It's not for an amorphous group of people who feel like they've been wronged generally by a prior administration."