WASHINGTON — President Donald Trump said Todd Blanche could remain acting attorney general if the Senate refuses to confirm him permanently. Trump also threatened to revive a proposed compensation fund that Republican senators have demanded the Justice Department abandon.
The comments increase pressure on Sens. John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina, whose opposition has prevented Blanche from advancing. The Senate Judiciary Committee is scheduled to reconsider the nomination Tuesday.
Blanche Could Continue Serving During the Standoff
Blanche may continue serving in an acting capacity while his nomination remains pending and has not been rejected or withdrawn. That arrangement allows him to direct Justice Department policy without obtaining immediate Senate confirmation.
Acting appointments provide continuity when a permanent office is vacant. They become more controversial when an administration appears to use temporary authority to bypass senators who are exercising their constitutional advice-and-consent role.
Trump suggested he could leave Blanche in place and submit the nomination again after Cornyn and Tillis leave the Senate. Both lawmakers are expected to depart after the current term, potentially removing two of the principal obstacles to confirmation.
The strategy carries legal and political risks. Extended acting service can generate litigation over statutory limits, while a delayed nomination leaves the department led by an official who has not received a final Senate vote.
Republican Senators Demand Written Assurances
Cornyn and Tillis want Blanche to provide written guarantees that the Justice Department will not create the proposed anti-weaponization fund. The two Republicans have said verbal assurances are insufficient because the administration has repeatedly changed its public position.
Their opposition is particularly significant because Democrats are expected to vote against the nominee. Blanche therefore needs near-unified Republican support to advance through the Judiciary Committee.
The senators have not framed the disagreement primarily around Blanche’s professional qualifications. Their objections involve the potential use of taxpayer money, the legal structure of a proposed settlement and whether the administration will honor commitments made during confirmation negotiations.
Written promises would create a record for future oversight. They could also expose Blanche to political consequences if the department later attempted to revive the fund under a different name or mechanism.
Trump Revives the Threat of an Anti-Weaponization Fund
The proposed fund would contain approximately $1.8 billion for people who claim they were harmed by politically motivated government investigations or prosecutions. Trump previously described the proposal as dead but now says he may pursue it through legislation.
Seeking legislation would address one of the central separation-of-powers concerns because Congress, rather than the Justice Department alone, would decide whether to authorize and appropriate the money. It would not resolve disputes over eligibility, favoritism or how claims would be evaluated.
Any legitimate compensation program would need neutral rules and an independent process. People who suffered provable government misconduct should have access to remedies, but political affiliation cannot become the principal qualification for receiving public money.
The proposal has drawn particular scrutiny because some Trump allies connected to Jan. 6 cases could potentially benefit. That possibility makes transparent standards and congressional debate essential.
Fund Is Connected to Trump’s IRS Litigation
The proposed fund is part of a broader potential settlement involving Trump’s lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service. Trump has sought approximately $10 billion over the disclosure and handling of his tax information.
A president has the same right as any citizen to seek relief when government officials violate the law. The conflict becomes more difficult when the Justice Department negotiating the settlement is led by the president’s own appointees.
Cornyn and Tillis have also objected to provisions that could limit future audits of Trump or associated individuals. They argue that correcting a past violation should not create immunity from lawful tax enforcement in the future.
A narrowly written settlement could compensate a specific injury while preserving ordinary audit authority. The senators want assurances that the administration will not use the litigation to establish protections unavailable to other taxpayers.
Tillis Warns That Reversal Threatens Confirmation
Tillis said Blanche could not be confirmed if the administration followed through on its latest reversal. He nevertheless expressed hope that an agreement could be reached before Tuesday’s committee meeting.
The statement gives both sides a limited period to negotiate. Blanche could provide a public commitment, Trump could clarify that any fund will proceed only through Congress, or the committee could postpone the vote again.
Another delay would keep Blanche in the acting role while avoiding an immediate defeat. It would also demonstrate that the White House remains unable to secure support from senators in its own party.
A failed committee vote would be more damaging. It could push Trump to withdraw the nomination or intensify efforts to challenge the senators politically.
Tuesday’s Committee Meeting Becomes a Test
The Judiciary Committee’s scheduled vote will show whether the latest threats strengthened Trump’s position or hardened Republican resistance. Cornyn and Tillis possess unusual leverage because the committee’s narrow balance leaves little room for defections.
Committee approval would move the nomination toward a vote by the full Senate. Blanche could still face additional questions about independence, conflicts of interest and his management of investigations involving political figures.
Failure would leave the department in a prolonged leadership dispute. The administration could continue relying on acting authority, but doing so would increase criticism that it is avoiding the constitutional confirmation process.
The hearing will also test whether Republican senators will impose limits on an administration they generally support. Advice and consent is most meaningful when lawmakers apply scrutiny to nominees selected by their own party.
Acting Leadership Has Institutional Consequences
A confirmed attorney general has stronger political and institutional legitimacy than a temporary official. Senate approval does not guarantee independence, but it requires a public hearing, recorded votes and commitments that lawmakers can later enforce through oversight.
An acting attorney general can exercise extensive authority over prosecutions, civil litigation, national security and federal law-enforcement priorities. Disputes over the appointment can therefore affect confidence in major department decisions.
The Justice Department also represents the United States in court. Litigants may challenge actions when they believe the official authorizing them lacks lawful appointment authority.
That uncertainty can be avoided through confirmation or the selection of another nominee capable of winning Senate support. Prolonged temporary leadership may serve immediate political goals but impose longer-term legal costs.
Congress Should Decide the Fund Separately
The compensation fund and Blanche’s qualifications are related politically but should be evaluated through distinct processes. The Senate can review the nominee while Congress separately debates whether the fund is lawful, necessary and fiscally responsible.
Trump’s suggestion that he may seek legislation provides an opportunity for that debate. Lawmakers could hold hearings, define eligible claims, require evidence and establish independent administration.
A transparent legislative process would be preferable to an executive settlement that directs money toward a politically connected group. It would also require members of Congress to take responsibility for supporting or rejecting the proposal.
The same principle applies to the nomination. Senators should vote based on the public record rather than allowing the administration to govern indefinitely through temporary appointments.
The Standoff Remains Unresolved
Trump’s latest comments make clear that he is prepared to keep Blanche in office without immediate confirmation. They also show that the president has not abandoned the broader idea of compensating people he believes were targeted by the federal government.
Cornyn and Tillis must now decide whether revised written commitments are credible. Blanche must decide how far he can limit administration policy without losing Trump’s support.
Tuesday’s meeting may move the nomination forward, delay it again or produce a direct defeat. Whatever the result, the controversy has become a larger test of Senate authority, executive power and equal treatment under federal law.
