President Trump nominates Todd Blanche to be attorney general

What This is

• President Trump said he will nominate acting Attorney General Todd Blanche, his former personal lawyer, to be the permanent U.S. attorney general, setting up a Senate confirmation vote.
• Blanche has led the Justice Department since Trump fired Attorney General Pam Bondi, and he previously served as deputy attorney general after a close Senate confirmation vote.
• Blanche’s expected nomination is likely to be contentious because critics argue his Justice Department has pursued investigations of Trump’s perceived opponents in ways that appear politically motivated.
• A major flashpoint has been a proposed roughly $1.776 billion “Anti-Weaponization Fund” tied to a settlement of Trump’s IRS-related lawsuit that was framed as compensating people who say they were unfairly targeted.
• Blanche told lawmakers the Justice Department will not move forward with the fund after a federal judge temporarily blocked payouts and bipartisan backlash grew, though he declined to put the decision in writing.
• Some lawmakers say only an explicit law can prevent the fund or similar payouts from being revived, and the dispute has complicated movement of a separate immigration enforcement funding package.
• Blanche said parts of the IRS settlement beyond the fund remain in effect, including a provision that limits review of past Trump tax audits, and Treasury officials have cited ongoing litigation when pressed.
• House Oversight Democrats have pushed to subpoena Blanche in connection with questions about how the Justice Department handled the release and review of Jeffrey Epstein-related records after Bondi deflected questions.

Why This Matters

• The nomination tests whether the Justice Department can be seen as enforcing laws independently from a president’s personal and political interests.
• Senate confirmation will signal how far Congress is willing to accept a former personal lawyer running federal law enforcement and shaping prosecutorial priorities.
• The fight over compensating alleged “political targeting” could set a precedent for using federal settlements to pay allies, affecting ethics and public trust.
• Unresolved terms in the IRS-related settlement raise questions about equal accountability when legal arrangements appear to reduce scrutiny of a sitting president.