Blanche's Written Answers Deepen Confirmation Fight

Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche's written responses to Senate Judiciary Committee questions have intensified opposition to his confirmation, after he declined to identify which Justice Department personnel negotiated a controversial settlement involving President Trump's own tax records.

Whitehouse Question Goes Unanswered

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island asked Blanche in writing: "Which DOJ personnel negotiated the tax amnesty and legal immunity provisions in the May 19, 2026, addendum?" Blanche responded: "It would be inappropriate for me to comment on internal deliberations that may or may not have occurred in conjunction with any official act by the Department of Justice."

The exchange was one of several written responses from Blanche that critics say show him continuing to act as Trump's personal attorney rather than as an independent law enforcement official, months after formally taking over as acting attorney general.

Fund Called "Dead" But Not Confirmed Dead

At his July 15 hearing before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Blanche testified under oath that the administration's $1.8 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund" — created as part of the settlement that would exempt Trump and his family from IRS audits of their past taxes — is "dead."

But Sen. John Cornyn of Texas pressed Blanche on whether he would confirm that in writing, and drew an admission from Blanche that Trump's attorneys could still attempt to sue to enforce the underlying contract, even if the department itself does not move forward with the fund. Blanche told the committee: "[Trump's attorneys] could try to enforce the contract. They can't force the Department of Justice to move forward with the weaponization fund."

One Republican Vote Could Sink Nomination

With Democrats on the Judiciary Committee unified in opposition, a single Republican "no" vote would be enough to block Blanche's nomination from advancing. Cornyn has not indicated how he will vote, and Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley of Iowa has not scheduled a committee vote more than a week after the hearing concluded.

Cornyn's reluctance follows what The American Prospect described as separate political friction with Trump, including the president's endorsement of a primary challenger against Cornyn's Texas Senate seat, a dynamic that could shape how the senator ultimately votes.

Hearing Also Covered Epstein Files

Beyond the IRS settlement, Blanche's July 15 hearing included extensive questioning over the Justice Department's handling of the Jeffrey Epstein files, an issue that has drawn bipartisan scrutiny throughout his tenure as acting attorney general.

Blanche previously won unanimous Republican support when he was confirmed as deputy attorney general early in Trump's second term. His path to the top job has proven considerably more contentious, complicated further by the death of Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, a longtime Judiciary Committee member whose vote would otherwise have factored into the nomination's outcome.

Critics Call For Rejection

An opinion piece from former assistant Watergate special prosecutor Nick Akerman, published this week, argued Blanche's written answers demonstrate "he's still acting as President Donald Trump's lawyer" even while serving as the nation's chief law enforcement officer, concluding the Senate "should not confirm him as attorney general."

Blanche has served as acting attorney general since April, after Trump removed Pam Bondi from the post, and was formally nominated for the permanent role in June.

Twelve Senators Submitted Questions

Twelve members of the Senate Judiciary Committee submitted written follow-up questions to Blanche in the days following his July 15 hearing, a standard post-hearing process that allows senators to press for additional detail beyond what time constraints permitted during live testimony. Blanche's written responses, including the Whitehouse exchange, were made public this week and immediately became the focal point of renewed criticism.

Blanche previously served as one of Trump's personal defense attorneys during the president's 2024 criminal trial in New York before joining the Justice Department, a background Democrats have repeatedly cited as evidence of a conflict of interest that persists even in his current government role. Blanche has consistently rejected that characterization, telling the committee during his hearing that he intends to place the interests of the American public above any loyalty to his former client if confirmed to the permanent position.

TheTrendsWire's Take

Blanche calling the fund "dead" under oath while simultaneously refusing to rule out Trump's lawyers suing to enforce it isn't really a contradiction, it's a precise legal distinction — the Justice Department can decline to act on the fund while the underlying contract, a separate legal instrument, remains technically enforceable in court. That distinction is exactly what's making Cornyn hesitate: a spoken assurance and a written confirmation carry very different legal weight, and Blanche has so far only offered the former.

Read More

• Judge Voids Trump IRS Deal Over Control of Both Sides

• Todd Blanche Hearing Leaves $1.776bn Fund Question Unresolved

• Judge Clears $5.8M Carroll Payment From Trump Case

• Trump Nominates Jay Clayton for DNI Amid Confirmation Delay

• Mitch McConnell Hospitalized as Health Questions Return Around Senate Veteran