Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche walked into his Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing with a razor-thin margin for error, and walked out without securing the votes he needs from his own party. Two key Republican senators, John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina, declined to commit to supporting Blanche after a day of pointed questioning on Capitol Hill, leaving the nominee's confirmation path uncertain heading into a second day of hearings.
The trouble for Blanche isn't coming from the expected direction. Senate Democrats have lined up against him, which surprises no one. The real problem is that Republicans on the Judiciary Committee are pressing him hard on a nearly $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund tied to a settlement between President Trump's family and the IRS, and Blanche's answers have not yet satisfied them.
Cornyn, a senior member of the committee, told reporters he remains undecided. His concern centers on the anti-weaponization fund and the underlying IRS settlement. When asked whether he would back Blanche, Cornyn was blunt with Fox News:
"Well, I don't know what other information's gonna be coming in. The hearing is not even halfway done. And so, you know, I don't have to make a decision now, so I'm not."
Cornyn also offered a telling observation about Blanche's posture throughout the hearing, saying the nominee was "trying to walk a very difficult line."
That line runs between loyalty to the president who nominated him and the independence the Senate demands of any attorney general. Blanche served as Trump's personal defense lawyer before becoming deputy attorney general and then acting AG. When Sen. John Kennedy of Louisiana asked whether Blanche considered himself the president's friend, the nominee caught himself mid-answer: "I'm his lawyer, was his lawyer, and now I'm the deputy attorney general."
It was a small stumble, but in a confirmation hearing where every word carries weight, Cornyn noticed. "I think he's trying to walk the line," he said.
The specific dollar figure at the center of Republican skepticism is $1.776 billion, the amount of the anti-weaponization fund created through the Trump-IRS settlement. Blanche told senators the fund is effectively dead. As Breitbart reported, Blanche stated plainly: "The weaponization fund is dead. It's not moving forward." He also confirmed that no money had been transferred from the Treasury.
But there's a gap between "dead" and formally dissolved. Blanche acknowledged under questioning that the IRS settlement remains "an enforceable document", a concession that the New York Post noted undercut his broader assurances. Trump never formally agreed in writing to end the fund. That distinction matters to Cornyn and Tillis, who want the fund killed by legislation, not just by executive assurance.
Tillis appeared somewhat more encouraged than Cornyn after Blanche agreed he would work on legislation to permanently end the fund. Still, the North Carolina senator did not commit his vote. He framed Blanche's willingness to cooperate on legislation as a meaningful signal:
"I think that's a pretty strong indication that he and the administration are OK with [it]. Does anybody really believe that the nominee for attorney general would answer that question if he didn't think that he had the support of the president to end this?"
That's a reasonable read, but it's still not a yes vote.
The political math makes every Republican holdout dangerous. The death of Sen. Lindsey Graham has shrunk the GOP's margin on the committee and in the full Senate. Blanche, who has served as acting attorney general since April, cannot afford to lose more than a handful of Republican votes on the floor, and losing even one on the committee could signal deeper trouble.
The Associated Press reported that the first day of hearings lasted approximately five hours. Throughout that time, Blanche argued he would serve as an independent attorney general if confirmed. But the length and intensity of questioning, from both sides of the aisle, suggested the committee is not yet ready to take that claim on faith.
If the Republican skepticism is substantive and focused, the Democratic opposition is broader and more personal. Sen. Dick Durbin of Illinois, the top-ranking Democrat on the committee, went after Blanche's character by attacking his former client:
"Anyone who can represent a known pathological liar like Donald Trump can have no integrity. You can't have integrity if you represent Donald Trump, because he is such an inveterate liar. And that person, of course, should never, never, never be attorney general."
Set aside the overheated rhetoric. The argument Durbin is making, that a lawyer lacks integrity because of who he represented, would disqualify half the defense bar in America. Criminal defense attorneys represent accused murderers, fraudsters, and worse. That's how the adversarial system works. Durbin knows this. He's a lawyer himself.
Sen. Chris Coons of Delaware took a slightly more measured approach, conceding that Blanche is "qualified... as someone who has been a prosecutor." But Coons said that qualification made Blanche's conduct worse, not better:
"But given his legal experience, he should have known better than to be willing to tolerate or support the weaponization of the department. Using it as a tool not to follow the facts and the law, to pursue justice, but to carry out a retribution agenda by President Trump."
The word "weaponization" has become a bipartisan accusation, each side hurling it at the other. Democrats accuse Trump's DOJ of weaponizing the department for political retribution. Republicans spent years arguing the Biden-era DOJ did exactly the same thing. The difference is that Blanche is the one sitting in the hearing chair, and it's his job to convince senators, including skeptics in his own party, that the department under his leadership would follow the law.
Beyond the anti-weaponization fund, senators pressed Blanche on the DOJ's handling of millions of documents related to convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. Durbin questioned Blanche about whether he would meet with Epstein survivors. The Washington Examiner noted that the Epstein issue is politically loaded: former Attorney General Pam Bondi became the most unpopular Trump Cabinet pick largely because of her handling of Epstein-related documents.
Blanche pushed back on suggestions that the DOJ had been anything less than forthcoming, telling senators: "We have been extraordinarily transparent in not only producing the records, but letting unredacted versions be available to anybody in this body."
The hearing also touched on FBI Director Kash Patel's conduct, with Blanche defending Patel against Democratic criticism. When Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse pressed on the subject, Blanche called the line of questioning "extraordinarily obnoxious", a rare flash of combativeness from a nominee who otherwise tried to project steadiness.
As Blanche prepared for a second day of questioning, the open questions remained substantial. Would Cornyn and Tillis get the legislative commitment they want on the anti-weaponization fund? Would Blanche offer more specific answers on the IRS settlement's legal status? Would any additional Republican senators signal reservations?
The committee vote schedule and timing of a potential floor vote remain unclear. What is clear is that Blanche's confirmation is not a foregone conclusion. Two Republican senators with legitimate policy concerns are withholding their support, and in a chamber where margins are already tight, that is enough to put the nomination in genuine jeopardy.
Blanche has the prosecutorial credentials. He has the president's confidence. What he doesn't yet have are the votes, and in the Senate, credentials and confidence don't count unless the math works.
