Could an attorney general nominee's unbinding promises about a voided billion-dollar settlement ultimately derail their confirmation?

Question

Accepted Answer

Yes. In this case, the nominee’s unbinding assurances could still derail confirmation because the Senate vote is so tight and the core concern is not just the fund itself, but whether the promises are legally durable and whether the nominee exercised independent judgment. Todd Blanche tried to steady support by rescinding the proposed $1.8 billion anti-weaponization fund and telling senators in writing that it would not be revived. He also narrowed the related tax-immunity arrangement to past claims involving the named plaintiffs only. Those commitments were enough to win back some skeptical senators on committee. But the objections did not disappear. Lisa Murkowski and Susan Collins both said they would oppose him, and critics argue Blanche’s documents do not bind all settlement parties, do not rewrite the underlying agreement, and do not clearly stop a future Justice Department from restoring the fund in another form. Democrats and outside legal experts have also argued the assurances may be unenforceable because they were not signed by all parties and may exceed DOJ authority. That matters because the controversy is broader than paperwork. A federal judge voided the Trump-IRS settlement, sharply questioned its legal basis, and described the lawsuit as an improper exercise in self-dealing. The judge also scrutinized the audit-immunity and liability-release provisions, reinforcing doubts about the arrangement Blanche helped defend. So the promises alone may not be enough. I…

Murkowski Opposes Todd Blanche, Leaving Trump’s AG Pick 1 GOP Vote From Defeat

Sources

Sources

Murkowski Opposes Todd Blanche, Leaving Trump’s AG Pick 1 GOP Vote From Defeat

Summary

Sources

Insights

Related Stories

Sources

Related Stories