10
Loading video...
By Andrew Stanton
Reporter
0
Share
Newsweek is a Trust Project member
See more of our trusted coverage when you search.Prefer Newsweek on Googleto see more of our trusted coverage when you search.
Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche’s agreement to win over Republican holdouts to advance his nomination has drawn scrutiny from some legal experts.
President Donald Trump nominated Blanche to lead the Department of Justice (DOJ) after former Attorney General Pam Bondi left office earlier this year. But his nomination has stalled as some Republicans expressed concern about the $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund, which the DOJ has said was designed to compensate people who claimed they were unfairly targeted by government investigations. Critics, however, raised concerns it could be used to compensate those convicted of crimes connected to the January 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol.
Blanche has repeatedly insisted the fund was dead since June but declines to put it in writing, and President Donald Trump had continued speaking positively about it. Last week, he threatened to revive the fund if Blanche’s nomination did not advance out of committee to a floor vote.
Read More on News
GOP Senators John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina have been key critics of the anti-weaponization fund, and their support would be needed for his nomination to advance.
The fund was part of a settlement of a lawsuit against the IRS by Trump.
Todd Blanche Scraps Anti-Weaponization Fund
Late on Sunday, Blanche said in a post on X that he formally scrapped the fund.
"My team and I have met with committee members and Senators over the past several weeks and addressed any concerns or outstanding questions. We have enjoyed good faith discussions, and as a result issue the following order and update with regard to the May IRS settlement. The Department always welcomes and appreciates productive engagement with all members of Congress," he wrote.
...
He posted two documents—one stating that the anti-weaponization fund has been formally ended and another document limiting the scope of the part of the settlement giving immunity to Trump and members of his family from tax audits, writing that it applies "only retroactively."
But some legal experts are skeptical about the agreement.
Newsweek reached out to the Justice Department for comment via email.
Donald Trump Reacts to Blanche Deal
Trump told reporters on Monday that he “didn’t look at” the deal.
“All I know is that Todd Blanche is great. He’s going to do a great job. Everybody knows it. And I understand there’s been a sign off, but I don’t know that they agreed. I think Todd Blanche agreed to reconfirm things that he’s already said, and what he’s said was OK,” Trump said.
The president also defended an exemption for his family on tax audits.
“They went after me illegally, and they did a lot of bad things to me like they did to other people,” Trump said. “It was weaponized against me.”
He also said the fund would have given those charged in connection to January 6 “some solace.”
“I thought it would be very fair for people that spent years in prison, people that were treated so badly. People who did absolutely nothing wrong, so I view that fund as a positive,” he said, adding that it is “for other things too.”
Blanche Deal Faces Legal Scrutiny
Legal experts told Newsweek there are some legitimate concerns about the deal on both the weaponization fund and the tax audit provision.
Former federal prosecutor Gene Rossi told Newsweek he believes the administration will still "try their best" to give January 6 defendants some sort of financial relief, and that the issue "probably will not go away."
Neama Rahmani, another former federal prosecutor, told Newsweek that he is taking Blanche at his word that he does not plan to pursue the weaponization fund, but that a future attorney general could still revisit it because the underlying settlement agreement, which he described as a "sham," still exists.
"Could potentially another attorney general try to reinstate the fund because the settlement agreement exists? I think, probably, yes. The best thing to do would be to rescind the settlement agreement itself," he said.
Michael McAuliffe, ex-federal prosecutor and former elected state attorney, told Newsweek he has concerns about the deal.
"The clearest indications that nothing should be taken as a final pronouncement of the fate of [the] ‘fund’ is that the President can, and likely will, try to impose his will or wish, on any attorney general at any time on any issue," he said. "It appears as if the ‘fund’ is off limits in order to achieve the confirmation of the president’s former personal lawyer as attorney general, but that’s for now and as a part of a previous AG order (not a court order)."
He said that nobody should "conclude its demise permanent," given contradictory statements about it.
Another aspect of the agreement that has drawn legal questions is the fact that the second document posted by Blanche, pertaining to the tax audits against Trump, appeared to be unsigned by Blanche or any of the parties involved.
Rossi said it is "odd" that it was unsigned.
"I remain a little bit skeptical on this IRS document which is unsigned by the acting attorney general. That raises a red flag for me," he said.
Rahmani said it was likely intentional that there was no signature because he still wants the fund to apply retroactively to Trump and his family.
Ben Meiselas, one of the founders of MeidasTouch, raised similar concerns in a post on X.
"This is also not signed by all the parties which is required to rescind under the terms of the original agreement, para. 8. This is an unenforceable sham document," he wrote.
Former federal prosecutor Barbara McQuade wrote in a post to X that Blanche’s "appeasement is hollow."
"Trump still gets immunity from tax audits worth $100 million. And last week’s payout to abortion clinic blocker shows the path to payouts to rewrite history will be individual settlements instead of one designated fund," she wrote.
How Trump Benefits From Blanche Agreement
Rossi said there are two major benefits for Trump, the first being that he will have his longtime attorney confirmed as the attorney general, adding that Blanche seems ready to "bend his knee to satisfy the president." Prior to his role at the Department of Justice, Blanche for years served as Trump's personal lawyer, representing him through high profile legal cases around the January 6 riots after his first term ended.
The second major benefit is that he and his family still have some immunity from tax audits, which may be "vastly more important" to him than the weaponization fund, he said.
Rahmani said it is a "good deal" for the president because of the tax audit provision.
Where Does Todd Blanche’s Nomination Stand?
Cornyn and Tillis wrote in a statement on Monday that they are "pleased" about the document.
"From the outset, we were clear that we needed a written document addressing our concerns on the IRS audit agreement and the anti-weaponization fund that included constraining the scope of audit protection by limiting it to the parties of the Settlement Agreement and legally ending the anti-weaponization fund," they wrote.
They said they "look forward to voting to advance his nomination out of the Senate Judiciary Committee soon."
With their support, Blanche’s nomination is likely to advance to a floor vote. Republicans hold a 53-47 majority in the Senate, and it’s unclear whether any Republicans would vote against him in a floor vote. He has previously been confirmed by the Senate for his role as deputy attorney general.
What to Know About Anti-Weaponization Fund
The DOJ in May announced an anti-weaponization fund designed to compensate people who claimed they were unfairly targeted by government investigations. Blanche framed it as a response to what President Donald Trump and his allies have described as "lawfare," but it drew swift bipartisan backlash.
Critics raised concerns that it could allow compensation for those convicted of crimes connected to the Capitol riot, including those found guilty of assaulting police officers. Blanche declined to publicly rule out such eligibility.
Blanche testified in June before Congress that the DOJ is "not moving forward with the fund."
"The reasons for the fund, I think, remain as important as they were before, but we are not moving forward with the fund," he said on June 2.
One day later, however, Trump told reporters he would "have to ask the lawyers" if the fund was dead but that it was a "beautiful thing."
Earlier this week, Trump wrote to Truth Social that if Cornyn and Tillis did not approve Blanche’s nomination, he would "keep Todd as Acting A.G., and push hard to get the Anti-Weaponization Bill, which takes care of those who have been so badly treated by the Crooked Joe Biden (and Obuma!) Administration (I get nothing, although I was treated horribly!), PASSED."
"Todd Blanche was a voice of reason! It will immediately be back on the table, and I will get it done," he said.
Contact Newsweek editors on this story: Jason Lemon and Trevor Davies.
View 0 Comments
Submit Correction
View Editorial & AI Guidelines