While some are focused on whether a couple of lame-duck Republican senators will vote to confirm Todd Blanche as attorney general, all senators should be aware: Blanche’s written responses to members of the Senate Judiciary Committee show how, even as he serves as acting attorney general, he’s still acting as President Donald Trump’s lawyer. He should not be confirmed. 

A key factor compromising Blanche’s fitness to be attorney general is his role in attempting to settle President Donald Trump’s $10 billion lawsuit against the IRS. Blanche is the only signatory to the May 19 release order, published by the Office of the Attorney General, that went beyond the $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization” fund and provided massive benefits, including IRS and other government immunity, to the president, his family, businesses and affiliates.

Do we really want an attorney general who will stand by Trump’s personal interests over a ruling by a federal judge?

Twelve members of the Senate Judiciary Committee posed written questions to Blanche in recent days. The exchanges are illuminating.

Sen. Chris Coons, D-Del., asked, “Is this release order still in effect?” Blanche answered, simply, “Yes.”

That response contradicts the recent order of federal Judge Kathleen M. Williams, who effectively prohibited Trump from relying on the settlement agreement. Williams, who oversaw Trump’s case against the IRS, held that the lawsuit was a manipulation of the federal court: “brought for an improper purpose — to gain the imprimatur of judicial legitimacy for a ‘settlement’ that had no viable basis in law or fact.”

Play

For Blanche to publicly claim the release order is still in effect directly undermines the rule of law. The Department of Justice was not a party to the lawsuit, which Trump filed in his personal capacity. It has no business being involved in conferring benefits upon Trump, his family members and “affiliates.” Do we really want an attorney general who will stand by Trump’s personal interests over a ruling by a federal judge?

It is no small matter that Blanche, already a high-ranking Justice Department official, has any role in Trump’s personal lawsuit against the IRS. Blanche has said that Trump has outside counsel for the lawsuit and that he did not speak to the president about the lawsuit settlement before it was mooted. But it was Blanche who has repeatedly defended the settlement terms, and he was Trump’s lead lawyer in the New York state prosecution that resulted in Trump being convicted on 34 felony counts.

Among his written questions, Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., asked Blanche, “Do you believe it was appropriate for you to sign a document that attempted to grant criminal immunity to your former client and his family?” Blanche danced around this glaring ethical issue, asserting, “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 document speaks for itself and does not extend to potential criminal charges.”

Blanche’s interpretation of the substance of the release order takes his credibility, already compromised by his handling of the Epstein files and treatment of victims, to an all-time low. During Blanche’s confirmation hearings last week, Sen. John Cornyn, R-Texas, asked about the release order while an image of the order was displayed on a large board behind him.

First, Cornyn questioned Blanche about the unspecified individuals the order covers, noting that the document mentions unnamed “related or affiliated individuals (including, without limitation, family or others filing jointly), or parties including trusts, parent, sister, or related companies, affiliates, and subsidiaries.”

Blanche replied “no” to Cornyn’s question of whether the release order purports to release anyone other than the named plaintiffs in the lawsuit.

But when Sen. Mazie K. Hirono, D-Hawaii, later asked the same question, Blanche directly contradicted himself. In a written question, Hirono asked Blanche to “Define ‘affiliated individuals’ under this document.” Blanche responded in writing, “The May 19, 2026, release speaks for itself.”

The evasion is important given the range of related and affiliated parties cited in the release order. Any experienced defense lawyer — and Blanche is one — knows that nonparties to the lawsuit, such as “sister” Ivanka Trump, could argue they are beneficiaries of the release order.

In the hearing, Cornyn later queried Blanche about the language granting immunity to parties over matters pending before government agencies or departments beyond the IRS and the Treasury Department. Cornyn asked, “Does this release apply to, let’s say, an investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission or some other federal agency?” Blanche responded, “No. That’s the standard language that we use when we enter into settlements between plaintiffs and the IRS. But no, it doesn’t bind — it’s issued by me because statutes require and authorize me to do that, as opposed to other Cabinet members, and in this case it binds only the IRS and, by extension, the Treasury.”

Cornyn replied, “Well, I hear what you’re saying, but I certainly don’t read that in the agreement.”

In a written follow-up, Coons said, “Please explain your statement to Senator Cornyn at the hearing that the release order ‘binds only the IRS and by extension the Treasury’ and not other agencies, despite the last line reading ‘before Defendants or other agencies or departments’” (emphasis in original).

Play

Again, Blanche did not revert to his hearing testimony that this language is “standard.” He responded that “The May 19, 2026 release speaks for itself.” Yet if the Securities and Exchange Commission should ever investigate any of the Trumps or their “affiliates” for insider trading, their lawyers could — and no doubt would — claim that the release order precludes federal investigation.

Notably, Blanche refused to name anyone else who participated in this fantastic giveaway to Trump family and affiliates. Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse, D-R.I., asked in a written question, “Which DOJ personnel negotiated the tax amnesty and legal immunity provisions in the May 19, 2026, addendum?”

Blanche stonewalled, saying, “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.”

Blanche’s handling of this issue alone shows that he prioritizes his loyalty to Trump over the good of the American people. The Senate should not confirm him as attorney general.