2025年10月21日，美國總統唐納德·川普在白宮公開確認，他已啟動行政程序，要求美國司法部賠償2.3億美元，理由是其在多起聯邦調查中權利受到侵害。他表示，這筆賠償最終將由他本人批准。此消息一出，立即在國內外引起廣泛關注，美國專家評論稱此舉“荒謬至極”。

事件的背景可以追溯到特朗普自2016年起捲入的多起聯邦調查，包括2017年至2019年的“通俄門”調查以及2022年的“機密文件案”。儘管相關指控最終均未導致定罪，川普仍依據《聯邦侵權索賠法》向司法部提出行政索賠，指控該部在調查過程中存在“惡意起訴”以及侵犯其隱私權，並稱因此花費數千萬美元進行辯護。

從法律程序上看，這筆索賠需通過司法部內部審批。然而，現任副司法部長布蘭奇等人曾是特朗普的辯護律師，引發明顯的利益衝突疑慮。法律專家指出，此案在美國司法史上幾乎無前例，涉及倫理困境“顯而易見”，因為司法部官員必須決定是否批准總統對自身部門的索賠，這本身就是對司法獨立性的重大考驗。

對於外界質疑，川普則表示，若最終獲得賠償，他將捐給慈善機構或用於白宮修繕。他亦坦言“自己決定是否給自己賠款”的荒誕性，但強調此案“非常有力”，認為司法部在調查中對自己不公。白宮與司法部則未對索賠本身作直接評論，只表示將遵循專業倫理指導。

此次事件的影響遠不止金額本身。它暴露出在政治壓力下，美國司法體系的脆弱性，也使得兩黨博弈的政治氛圍更加緊張，進一步加劇公眾對司法公正性的質疑。輿論的關注點逐漸從法律層面轉向政治表演，川普藉此訴訟強化“受害者”敘事，進一步加劇社會分裂與政治對立。整個事件既是一場法律爭議，也是一場高度政治化的公眾博弈，折射出美國政治與司法交織的複雜現實。

On October 21, 2025, U.S. President Donald Trump publicly confirmed at the White House that he had initiated an administrative procedure requesting the Department of Justice (DOJ) to pay $230 million in damages, citing violations of his rights during multiple federal investigations. He stated that the final approval of this payment would rest with himself. The announcement immediately drew widespread attention both domestically and internationally, with U.S. experts calling the move “absurd.”

The background of this claim dates back to multiple federal investigations involving Trump since 2016, including the “Russia investigation” (2017–2019) and the 2022 classified documents case. Although none of the charges led to convictions, Trump filed an administrative claim under the Federal Tort Claims Act, alleging “malicious prosecution” and violations of his privacy by the DOJ, which he claimed forced him to spend tens of millions of dollars on legal defense.

Legally, the claim requires internal DOJ approval. However, current Deputy Attorney General Lisa Branch and other officials involved previously served as Trump’s defense attorneys, raising obvious conflicts of interest. Legal experts have noted that this case is unprecedented in U.S. history, presenting a clear ethical dilemma, as DOJ officials would be tasked with approving a claim filed by the President against their own department—testing the limits of judicial independence.

In response to criticism, Trump stated that if the claim were approved, he would donate the funds to charity or use them for White House renovations. He acknowledged the absurdity of “deciding for himself whether to pay himself” but insisted the case was “very strong” and that the DOJ had treated him unfairly. The White House and DOJ did not comment directly on the claim, only noting that professional ethical guidelines would be followed.

The broader implications of this event extend beyond the monetary amount. It exposes the vulnerability of the U.S. judicial system under political pressure and intensifies partisan battles, further fueling public skepticism about judicial fairness. Public attention has shifted from the legal merits to political theater, with Trump using the lawsuit to reinforce a “victim” narrative, deepening societal divisions and political polarization. The episode serves both as a legal controversy and a highly politicized public spectacle, reflecting the complex interplay between politics and justice in the United States.