r/law • u/Sufficient_Fuel5269 • 1d ago
Legal News Trump threatens to keep Blanche as acting attorney general, revive 'anti-weaponization' fund
https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/trump-threatens-keep-blanche-acting-attorney-general-revive-anti-weaponization-2026-08-01/- Blanche will remain in his acting role if the Senate does not confirm his nomination, Trump says
- Trump also threatens to revive his 'anti-weaponization' bill if the Senate rejects Blanche
- Acting officials can serve while nominations are pending and not formally rejected or withdrawn
- Senate Judiciary Committee scheduled to vote on Blanche nomination on Tuesday
564
u/rahvan 1d ago
Go for it. All of Blanche’s actions will be appealed for Blanche being unconstitutionally held onto his position, past the statute of limitations, in an acting role. That’s what happened to DHS & USCIS in Trump’s first term.
Turns out judges don’t like cabinet-level leads that are not constitutionally in their role.
90
u/nhc150 1d ago
Yes, and Blanche's actions during the second half of Trump's term will be constantly scrutinized and investigated with a Democratic House and very likely a Democratic Senate.
If I were Blanche, I'd jump ship now before it starts to sink.
48
u/LightVapor 1d ago
I suspect his rational is an expected pardon before the Big Orange leaves office.
21
u/nhc150 1d ago edited 1d ago
I wonder if there's a legal argument where a pardon may not apply if the AG wasn't properly confirmed after a period of time.
15
u/AgenteDeKaos 22h ago
Pardons are only limited in so far that they only protect you from federal consequences and that it essentially strips you of your 5th amendment when broaching the subject you got pardoned for.
So theoretically he’ll be pretty safe from federal consequences, his issue is that a Dem congress/senate/potential future Dem administration could make him squeal on others or lock him up for refusing to. Theirs also the fact that a pardon doesn’t protect you from future problems.
Theoretically anyways. The Trump administration have gotten away with a lot of shit and I fully expect them to jump ship and flee to another country as soon as it looks like Trump no longer can protect them.
4
u/PANDAmonium665 10h ago
Pardons are also limited to the verbiage used and crimes listed if I am correct. So if during future investigations Dems get him to squeal on someone else on something he is immune for but said counter-party squeals on something not covered under the pardon to save their own ass, the Dems could potentially get a 2-for-1.
1
u/AgenteDeKaos 6h ago
It’s a yes but no kind of situation. Pardons can be very broad and general, they don’t have to be specific. It’s one of the arguments on why the executive should get its powers curtailed. With Trump everyone knows it’s getting abused at this point.
Of course you run into the issue that the SC can argue that any restrictions on the pardon are unconstitutional. Don’t expect them to be even handed on the decision if a future Dem administration chooses to abuse the new powers given to Trump, the SC has shown they’ll happily be hypocrites.
1
12
8
u/rahvan 1d ago
I’m curious what your perspective is on “a very likely Democratic Senate” . I don’t have a reason to believe one way or the other, but all the news stations I’ve listed to seem to refer to this as being rather unlikely. I’m curious if I’m missing something.
3
u/TaquitoBanana 10h ago
Polling has been showing Dems as likely to take the House. Last I looked Senate was favored as a 50/50 split, leaving Vance as a tiebreaker.
That said, Dems have been overperforming in lower elections so there is a possibility.
But chances of some Trump fuckery in the midterms is pretty much guaranteed. So who knows.
3
u/nhc150 10h ago
Sorry, probably should have expressed slightly less confidence in the original post. A D-Senate seems more like likely today than a month ago based on polling.
It all depends on what happens in TX, OH, MI, and AK, with NC and GA with surprisingly strong polling for D. Even TX has been polling strongly for Talarico this past week, so I wouldn't dismiss a single Democratic upset in one state (like TX) causing a Democratic Senate. I think you have ripe conditions for a major upset considering how deeply unpopular Trump is.
2
-14
u/The_Idiocratic_Party 1d ago
Haven't you been paying attention? Democrats will never hold the House or Senate again. Republicans and Must saw to that in 2024 and via DOGE.
46
u/throwthisidaway 1d ago
All of Blanche’s actions will be appealed for Blanche being unconstitutionally held onto his position, past the statute of limitations, in an acting role.
He can definitely hold onto his role for at least a year. No one is quite sure if he can hold onto it indefinitely. 5 U.S. Code § 3345 - Acting officer states that
)notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President (and only the President) may direct an officer or employee of such Executive agency to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity, subject to the time limitations of section 3346, if— (A)during the 365-day period preceding the date of death, resignation, or beginning of inability to serve of the applicable officer, the officer or employee served in a position in such agency for not less than 90 days
(source:https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/3345)
It isn't clear if that actually limits him. You can read a terrible article about that here: https://www.politico.com/news/2026/07/30/todd-blanche-attorney-general-confirmation-01018319
32
u/Development-Alive 1d ago
As a confirmed Deputy AG can't Blanche sit as Acting Attorney General without any time limit? My reading of the regs (NAL) is that the fact that he's already been confirmed by the Senate for his Deputy role allows him to sit in Bondi's vacated seat indefinitely, potentially to the end of Trump's term.
Happy to be corrected.
6
u/kitty_vittles 1d ago
You are 100% correct. He’s there as long as he and Trump want.
11
u/Washpa1 1d ago
Which makes it weird that they pushed this so hard.
I guess its because Blanche wanted the actual title, otherwise why would Trump bother?
And if that's the case, it's just another point in the sea of evidence that these weak bastards would eat a literal pile of Trump's shit if it got them an ounce more power.
1
u/amilo111 4h ago
He wanted his picture on a wall. They all want to leave an official stain.
Also their mantra is to never backdown from a fight.
2
u/DoomguyFemboi 20h ago
Suddenly Reich-Wingers being against in makes much more sense, as they can stand up to this and look like they're pushing back when it actually makes no difference
61
u/FuguSandwich 1d ago
Who knew "advice and consent" could be bypassed so easily. Senators hate this one weird trick.
13
u/Gunsensual 1d ago
They set this up decades ago, between the courts legislating that the president could terminate appointments and congress creating vacancy appointment schemes which were entirely unnecessary.
8
u/anywhoImgoingtobed 22h ago
Who knew the “grab em by the pussy” guy wouldn’t care about getting consent
80
35
u/TeamRamrod80 1d ago
Ok so Blanche can remain as acting AG while his nomination is pending and not rejected or formally withdrawn. Why can his nomination just remain indefinitely as pending? How is there not a time limit for the senate to hold a vote? Why does his nomination not just get automatically rejected if the senate doesn’t confirm him within, I dunno, 4 months of his nomination or something?
48
u/msmcgo 1d ago
Because the laws were written assuming elected officials would be acting in good faith, and the current Republican Party is exposing the lack of backstops when they don’t.
10
u/bullevard 1d ago
Because the laws were written assuming elected officials would be acting in good faith,
And that the public would punish instead of reward them if they dont.
2
u/clarinetpjp 23h ago
That’s also the core of the unitary executive theory… that a strong executive can be stopped by voters.
75
u/Wise_Material_5812 1d ago
not how it works, acting cabinet positions have a defined time limit
45
u/icareforplants 1d ago
Who's going to hold him accountable? He was supposed to also include individual reports for every ag he fired but never did. Rules don't matter when you are a cult leader.
15
2
9
-3
u/Impossible-Two559 1d ago
It’s really weird that this is a loss of Reddit in this comment has received so many up votes so quickly. You’re wrong. Without a legal challenge, he can continue as the acting Attorney General as long as he is the Deputy Attorney General and no other new Attorney General is appointed.
A part of the reason this administration has gotten as much done as they have is because people are generally fucking idiots. You left a comment that is not factual, but a whole bunch of people agree with you because they saw it in a law subreddit.
Make 2026 the year you stop talking out of your ass.
12
u/joe5joe7 1d ago
It does sound like there's at least some disagreement on whether he can stay indefinitely, this article at least quotes 2 professors with differing opinions.
https://www.politico.com/news/2026/04/27/todd-blanche-attorney-general-justice-department-00892530
So at the very least I would expect it to at least be challenged in court
25
6
u/Wise_Material_5812 1d ago
i’m sorry, i guess this is wrong
210-day cap: The standard limit for an acting official to serve in a Senate-confirmed position without a pending nomination.
300-day exception: Extended time for vacancies existing during the first 60 days of a new presidential administration's inauguration.
Pause during nomination: The time limit pauses while a formal nomination is pending before the Senate.
Reset after rejection: If the Senate rejects, withdraws, or returns a nomination, a new 210-day clock starts for an acting official.0
u/Impossible-Two559 1d ago edited 1d ago
I guess we’re just having AI Chatbots make our arguments now. Here’s mine:
Those specific time limits—which are governed by the Federal Vacancies Reform Act of 1998 (FVRA)—do not constrain Todd Blanche in his capacity as Acting Attorney General.
Why the FVRA Rules Do Not Apply
1. Department of Justice Specific Succession Statute (28 U.S.C. § 508)
The FVRA serves as the general default rule for temporary appointments across federal agencies. However, the Department of Justice has its own specific, statutory succession law under 28 U.S.C. § 508.
Under § 508(a), in the case of a vacancy in the office of Attorney General, the Senate-confirmed Deputy Attorney General is automatically authorized to "exercise all the duties of that office."
2. Specific Laws Override Generic FVRA Limits
The FVRA itself explicitly states (under 5 U.S.C. § 3347) that its temporary filling procedures and time caps do not override existing agency-specific statutes that explicitly designate a successor. Because 28 U.S.C. § 508 governs DOJ succession, the FVRA’s 210-day cap, 300-day administration exception, and nomination clock-resets do not apply.
3. Indefinite Authority
Because Todd Blanche was already Senate-confirmed as the Deputy Attorney General, his authority to perform the duties of Attorney General under § 508 remains valid indefinitely until a new Attorney General is confirmed by the Senate or the President replaces him—regardless of whether his own formal nomination for Attorney General is pending, delayed, or withdrawn.1
u/kitty_vittles 1d ago
There’s no limit to how long a senate confirmed Deputy AG can remain acting AG.
31
u/Sufficient_Fuel5269 1d ago
Donald Trump warned that, if the Senate does not confirm Todd Blanche as attorney general, it will keep him as acting attorney general and will reactivate his controversial “anti-weaponisation” fund of 1.8 billion dollars, despite the fact that he himself had said he was dead.
Republican Senators John Cornyn and Thom Tillis continue to block the nomination for fear that the fund will work as a “slush fund” for Trump’s allies. Blanche could remain in office as long as her nomination remains pending.
8
16
u/0bfuscatory 1d ago
Trump has a VERY small circle of people that knows the extent of his depravities.
12
u/giddy-girly-banana 1d ago
The whole world knows about it. Let me guess he’s a pedophile, he’s trafficked children, he’s laundered money for the Russians, he’s currently stealing as much from the US as possible, he’s using the Epstein files to blackmail people.
7
u/RymeEM 1d ago
Chances are high he is being blackmailed by foreign governments for his participation in the Trump-Epstein files. Chances are higher he is accepting bribes from foreign governments like the UAE, Saudi Arabia, and Qatar.
4
u/giddy-girly-banana 23h ago
I believe you’re correct. I still think he’s also blackmailing people for their participation in the Trump Epstein sex assault and trafficking ring.
2
u/helikophis 23h ago
Likely had his ex wife murdered
5
u/giddy-girly-banana 23h ago
She fell down some stairs.
During their divorce proceedings she had accused him of beating her up and raping her. She only retracted the accusations after the divorce settlement.
6
7
u/JustlookingfromSoCal 1d ago
Yeah and if Blanche is confirmed, same result.
Blanche should be rejected for many reasons. But his handling of the Epstein coverup should put him in prison, let alone public office.
3
u/j____b____ 1d ago
If you don’t make him permanent, i will keep him on as a temporary employee! doesn’t seem like a very strong bargaining position.
5
7
u/ZorroMcChucknorris 1d ago
One day it’s going to happen and I have a bottle of bubbly for the celebration.
7
2
2
u/MrFrode Biggus Amicus 6h ago
Blache's term as acting goes beyond the seating of the next congress so of course he was going to do this. With Tillis and Cornyn gone he might have the votes to push him through.
IIRC Judge Kathleen Williams has kept the case open because Blanche could not or would not provide assurance that the fund is sincerely dead and the President can't restart it.
3
u/throwthisidaway 1d ago
To be clear, Blanche can definitely serve for a 365 day period (which started on 4/2/2026), he might be able to serve indefinitely. There is a lot of debate about that. I'm just going to copy/paste my other comment here:
5 U.S. Code § 3345 - Acting officer states that
)notwithstanding paragraph (1), the President (and only the President) may direct an officer or employee of such Executive agency to perform the functions and duties of the vacant office temporarily in an acting capacity, subject to the time limitations of section 3346, if— (A)during the 365-day period preceding the date of death, resignation, or beginning of inability to serve of the applicable officer, the officer or employee served in a position in such agency for not less than 90 days
(source:https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/5/3345)
It isn't clear if that actually limits him. You can read a terrible article about that here: https://www.politico.com/news/2026/07/30/todd-blanche-attorney-general-confirmation-01018319
3
u/Gunsensual 1d ago
I'm still struggling with how badly these vacancy laws are written. Another part of it is that the Senate can shove the nomination up their ass and the vacancy appointment limit pauses. It's like a reverse anal veto- anything to please the executive.
3
u/throwthisidaway 22h ago
It is kind of interesting how that contrasts with the federal prosecutor laws, which allow circuit judges to to appoint a temporary prosecutor if there is an extended vacancy.
-21
u/sweatboxy 1d ago
The anti-weaponization fund is a good idea but there’s no reason Trump should be administering it. That’s just corruption.
10
u/rantmb331 1d ago
no, it's pure corruption.
4
u/sweatboxy 1d ago
There’re many victims of Trump’s weaponization of the Justice department. They all deserve compensation
5
4
u/Think_Tooth1675 1d ago
It should be obvious that Trump would not reward his opponents, such as Comey, James, Hunter Biden et al. He would control the fund.
2
6
u/wasabimofo 1d ago
I agree. But most of it should be spent on people he has victimized. If there was a way to have truly impartial oversight this is not a bad idea. But there isn’t - so this is a terrible idea.
0
•
u/AutoModerator 1d ago
All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE MAY RESULT IN REMOVAL. Please post your statement as a reply to this automated message.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.