Lines Blurred: Todd Blanche’s Responses to Senators Signal He’s Still Acting Like Trump’s Personal Lawyer
For Todd Blanche—President Donald Trump’s nominee for Attorney General and former criminal defense attorney—that distinction has become the central flashpoint of his confirmation battle. In written replies and formal testimony delivered to members of the Senate, Blanche’s defense-first posture, institutional deflections, and refusal to disclose private consultations with Trump have convinced critics that he remains, in practice, the president’s personal counsel.
Shielding Conversations and the IRS Settlement
One of the key friction points between Blanche and Senate Judiciary members involves a $10 billion lawsuit settlement between Trump and the IRS over the 2019 leak of the president's tax records. Attached to the settlement was an unusual clause precluding the federal government from launching new audits or investigations into the tax returns of Trump, his family, or his business entities.
When pressed in written and verbal inquiries by senators—including Senator Chris Coons (D-Del.)—about whether he advised Trump against the arrangement or consulted with him directly on the terms, Blanche repeatedly refused to answer. Invoking executive confidentiality and privilege, Blanche asserted that he would not discuss private communications with the president.
To legal scholars and opposing lawmakers, this maneuver mirrored the strategy of a defense attorney invoking privilege to shield a private client, rather than an independent public servant accountable to congressional oversight.
"Todd Blanche has made it abundantly clear that his client is Donald Trump—not the American people."
— Sen. Mazie Hirono (D-Hawaii)
Defending the Anti-Weaponization Fund and Executive Discretion
Senate scrutiny has also focused on the controversial $1.776 billion "Anti-Weaponization Fund"—a DOJ initiative conceived to compensate individuals claiming government persecution during previous administrations.
While Blanche assured lawmakers that the administration is "not moving forward" with the fund following bipartisan pushback, his formal responses raised eyebrows. When senators requested a formal written declaration or binding administrative order rescinding the fund, Blanche declined, arguing that courts lack authority to compel Cabinet-level officials to submit such sworn declarations and asserting that oral testimony under oath sufficed.
Furthermore, when questioned regarding President Trump’s controversial pardons of individuals charged in connection with the January 6 Capitol attacks, Blanche maintained a strictly technical defense of presidential authority, stating: "He has the absolute right to pardon anybody for any reason he sees fit."
Slip-of-the-Tongue or Reality?
Perhaps the most telling moment of the confirmation proceedings occurred when Blanche slipped into familiar legal habits on the floor. In a revealing exchange regarding his relationship with the president, Blanche stated directly to the committee: "I'm his lawyer"—before quickly catching himself to clarify, "was his lawyer."
While Blanche insists that "President Trump trusts me to give him counsel, [and] counsel does not mean a 'yes man,'" opponents argue his written record tells a different story. The New York City Bar Association took the rare step of formally opposing his confirmation, citing concerns over politically motivated investigations, ethical conflicts, and a perceived failure to separate departmental policy from the president's personal interests.
As the Senate Judiciary Committee prepares to vote on advancing his nomination to the full chamber, Blanche faces an uphill battle to persuade skeptical lawmakers—including key swing Republicans—that he can transcend his role as a private defender to become an impartial guardian of the law.