During his confirmation hearing to be Attorney General, Todd Blanche confirmed what we’ve known all along: he still views himself as President Trump’s personal lawyer. Blanche also left a number of important questions unanswered. Based on input from subject matter experts in Justice Connection’s DOJ alumni network – former Assistant United States Attorneys, public corruption prosecutors, civil rights and environmental litigators, and more – we prepared questions for the record that Blanche should answer before Senators vote on his nomination.

Motions to Vacate Seditious Conspiracy Convictions

On or about April 11, 2026, the department moved to vacate the seditious conspiracy convictions of leaders of the Proud Boys and Oath Keepers.

• Given that these convictions were secured at trial and upheld on appeal, did any career prosecutors recommend against pursuing this motion?
• Prior to the filing, did you receive any communications from the White House, or the President himself, regarding these specific cases?
• Have you, the Principal Assistant Deputy Attorney General, the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, or the Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights had direct contact—including via text—with January 6 defendants or their counsel while serving in the Justice Department? Do you commit to providing those communications to the committee?
• Do you acknowledge that there is no credible evidence suggesting federal agents or law enforcement instigated the events at the Capitol on January 6? Do you agree that the “fedsurrection” theory is meritless?

Personnel Actions and Removals

• Earlier this year you boasted at the Conservative Political Action Conference that there is no longer “a single man or woman at the Department of Justice who had anything to do with” the Trump criminal prosecutions. What is the total number of attorneys, agents, and staff members previously assigned to the January 6 or classified documents prosecutions who have been terminated, demoted, or reassigned during your tenure as Deputy Attorney General and Acting Attorney General?
• On January 28, 2025, now-Judge Emil Bove directed Ed Martin to fire prosecutors who worked on January 6 cases in the Capitol Siege Section, calling their appointments “subversive personnel actions.” What was your involvement in those firings? How many times did you discuss this topic with Mr. Bove prior to your confirmation as Deputy Attorney General?
• On April 7, 2026, at your first press conference after becoming Acting Attorney General, you defended firing career prosecutors who handled the classified documents and election interference cases against Donald Trump by saying, “if you were a prosecutor and you were trying to prosecute your boss, you have ethical duties that I think prevent you from continuing to work in that environment.” What specific Rule(s) of Professional Conduct or department policy mandates such an obligation?
• What was the justification for the removal of Ed Martin as chair of the Weaponization Working Group? Will you commit to providing materials regarding his removal to the committee?
• How often did you meet with Mr. Martin regarding the working group’s activities during his leadership?
• What is Mr. Martin’s current role at the department? What are his job duties?

DOJ Independence

• At a press conference this April you said it is the President’s “right” to intervene in individual criminal cases and target his political enemies for prosecution. Putting the question of his constitutional authority aside, doesn’t presidential involvement in individual criminal cases undermine confidence in the Justice Department and the federal criminal justice system?

• Does the direct involvement of the President in criminal prosecutions erode the public trust that DOJ tried to restore following the Watergate scandal?
• Do you believe it is ethically sound or just for any President to direct the use of DOJ’s prosecutorial power?

• Before your confirmation as Deputy Attorney General, you committed to following all governing Attorney General memoranda, including any addressing contacts between DOJ and the White House. Is the contacts policy currently in the Justice Manual, dated July 21, 2021, still in force?
• If so, are you following it?
• If not, will you commit to issuing a White House contacts policy that protects the department’s criminal and civil decisions from partisan or other inappropriate influences?
• Have you or any members of your office ordered or approved the opening of any grand jury investigations because you were asked to do so by the President or any member of his staff?
• Have you or any members of your office been contacted by the President or any member of his staff about any open investigations or charged cases?
• Have you or any members of your office asked any U.S. Attorney’s Offices to open investigations or pursue criminal charges involving a public official that the President has publicly supported or criticized?
• If you had sufficient evidence to open an investigation into a member of the President’s Cabinet, or a member of his staff, would you do so?

Assistance in the President’s Misuse of Executive Clemency

Under your leadership, the department has effectively institutionalized the President’s corrupt exploitation of the pardon power.

• The Justice Manual outlines a series of procedures to evaluate pardon recommendations (see JM 9-1.40.111 and JM 9-140.112), which ensures uniform criteria for commutation petitions. If confirmed, will you commit to following these policies?
• You recently testified before the House Appropriations Committee that it’s illegal to pay a bribe to obtain a pardon. If there is evidence someone paid a bribe to obtain a pardon from President Trump, do you commit that the department will investigate it?
• If credible evidence emerges that Ed Martin – or any DOJ official – accepted or facilitated the payment of a bribe for a pardon, would you fire them?

“Anti-Weaponization Fund”

You testified before a House appropriations subcommittee that the $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization fund” is “not going forward, period,” but you also said that the reasons behind the fund “remain as important as they were before.”

• According to The New York Times, your Principal Associate Attorney General, Trent McCotter, created the Fund. Is that accurate? Who else helped devise the fund?
• What was Boris Epshteyn’s role in creating the Fund?
• If the President tells you to reverse your decision, will you move forward with the Fund?
• Has any January 6 defendant, or their counsel, applied for or inquired about a payment? Will you commit to providing us with records of any January 6 defendant who seeks compensation from the Fund or from the federal government through other means?

How did the department calculate the $1.776 billion sum requested from the Judgment Fund?

• Was this amount derived from a specific assessment of litigation risk?
• Did the department make any specific assumptions regarding the identity of claimants against the “anti-weaponization fund” when seeking the $1.776 billion?
• Did those assumptions include individuals who assaulted law enforcement or engaged in the destruction of property at the Capitol?
• In the absence of such assumptions, by what objective metrics was the $1.776 billion figure established?

Judgment Fund

You’ve claimed the administration is not moving forward with the $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization” fund, but under your leadership, DOJ has already used taxpayer dollars to settle lawsuits by the president’s allies. Earlier this year, DOJ agreed to pay $1.25 million to Michael Flynn, even though a federal court had previously dismissed Flynn’s claim that he was a victim of malicious prosecution.

• If confirmed, what criteria will you use (or instruct DOJ staff to use) when deciding whether to settle a case or administrative claim where the settlement would be paid from the Treasury Department’s Judgment Fund?

• What factors will you consider (or instruct DOJ staff to consider) when determining the amount of a settlement to be paid from the Judgment Fund?

• Do you commit to settling cases with Judgment Fund payouts only when there is a substantial risk that the United States would be held liable if the case proceeded to trial?
• Do you commit that under your leadership, DOJ will not give any Judgment Fund payouts to rioters who assaulted law enforcement on January 6?

Epstein Survivor Rights and Privacy

• Why did you disregard longstanding department guidance, reflected in the Attorney General’s Guidelines on Victim Witness Assistance, by releasing the Epstein files with information that directly compromised the anonymity of Epstein survivors?
• Prior to the public disclosure of sensitive materials that identified survivors of Jeffrey Epstein, did you undertake any efforts to notify all affected individuals to explain the scope of the release, the justification for it, and the specific measures you intended to implement for their protection?

Ghislaine Maxwell and Epstein Investigation

You portrayed your July 2025 interview with Ghislaine Maxwell, Jeffrey Epstein’s convicted co-conspirator, as a pursuit of justice where “no lead is off-limits.” However, reports indicate that you failed to consult the lead prosecutor – Maurene Comey – to prepare for this interview, and she was terminated without notice or explanation immediately prior to your meeting with Maxwell.

• Why didn’t you consult with the lead prosecutor before interviewing a witness as pivotal as Maxwell?
• During the interview, did you confront Maxwell with the sentencing judge’s findings that she played a “pivotal role” in a “horrific scheme” to traffic girls as young as 14?
• Why did you describe her conduct as mere “allegations” when a jury’s conviction had already been affirmed on appeal?
• How do you reconcile your testimony that Maxwell was moved from “low security” to “low security” with the fact that unlike the facility in Tallahassee, the camp in Bryan is a minimum-security facility with dormitory housing and no perimeter fencing?
• Did Maxwell’s transfer comport with Bureau of Prisons policy?

While you have publicly stated that you “fight for victims” and have met with their legal counsel, many Epstein survivors report feeling betrayed by the department’s actions under your leadership.

• Why were survivors forced to learn about Maxwell’s transfer to a low-security facility through news reports rather than from the Department of Justice?
• How do you respond to Judge Paul Engelmayer’s recent assessment that the department has only paid “lip service” to these survivors without providing the solicitude they are legally and ethically owed?

Use of Deadly Force and Civil Rights Enforcement

• Has DOJ opened a criminal civil rights investigation into the circumstances surrounding the death of Renee Good? If not, why?
• Public reports indicate that the Criminal Section of the Civil Rights Division, the component typically charged with pursuing these matters, has been gutted. Who is assigned to investigate the death of Alexander Pretti and what is their level of experience?
• Has the Justice Department assigned any attorneys from the Civil Rights Division to investigate the recent shooting deaths of Lorenzo Salgado Araujo in Texas and Joan Sebastián Durán Guerrero in Maine?

Criminal civil rights enforcement includes a commitment to investigating unconstitutional conditions of confinement. Yet, there are countless public reports of conditions in ICE detention facilities that shock the conscience for their barbarity and cruelty.

• How many investigations into ICE facilities has DOJ opened during your time in leadership?
• Who is assigned to these matters?
• What is your plan for analyzing whether those who have been deliberately indifferent to unconstitutional conditions of confinement in ICE facilities should be prosecuted?

Decimation of the Public Integrity Section

• I assume you agree that predication is critically important for all investigations, including those involving public corruption. In the wake of the decimation of the Public Integrity Section last year, what specific policies and procedures has the department implemented to ensure that public corruption investigations are not initiated without legitimate predication?
• The Justice Manual requires the Public Integrity Section’s approval for certain actions involving prosecutions of members of Congress, including charging a member for conduct related to public office or campaign activities.This helps ensure apolitical, consistent, and competent prosecutions. Is the department still following this requirement?
• Did the department follow the requirement when prosecutors tried to indict six Democratic members of Congress over their video about unlawful orders?

The Justice Manual has a provision pertaining to the “corruption of elections” that mandates consultation with the Public Integrity Section in federal criminal matters involving campaign finance violations and crimes or corruption of the election process. DOJ’s website says that “Department leadership is currently revising this section. The Consultation Requirement is suspended while revisions are ongoing. [June 2025].”

• What revisions are being made or have been made to this important oversight for ensuring that department investigations of campaign finance violations and interference with elections are being investigated correctly, with proper expertise, and consistently?
• Why is it necessary to suspend this protection before the revision has been completed?

Grand Jury Abuse

The constitutional standard for indictment is probable cause, but the Justice Department has long held its prosecutors to a higher standard under which they should not present an indictment unless they believe the admissible evidence will probably be sufficient to obtain and sustain a conviction.

• If confirmed, will you commit to ensuring all Justice Department prosecutors adhere to that standard? What specific steps will you take to do so?
• Do you agree that prosecutors can instruct grand juries on the law but cannot interject their own opinion?
• Do you agree that prosecutors cannot tell grand jurors to trust them to only bring strong cases?
• Considering the number of cases under review in Chicago following the dismissal of cases where prosecutors engaged in misconduct before a grand jury, if confirmed, what steps will you take to ensure that prosecutors throughout the country understand their proper role before grand juries?

Environmental Enforcement

Since the commencement of the current presidential term, the Environment [now Energy] and Natural Resources Division (ENRD) has experienced a precipitous decline in staffing, with some legal sections losing nearly half of their personnel. While recruitment was eventually permitted for defensive litigators, the Environmental Enforcement Section – which is primarily responsible for civil enforcement of pollution control and cleanup laws – was only authorized to fill vacancies in June 2026, following public scrutiny of these vacancies.

• Why was the authorization to recruit for the Environmental Enforcement Section delayed until staff shortages were publicized?
• How have the staff shortages affected the work of the Environmental Enforcement Section?
• During the first two years of the administration, how many complaints were filed, judgments entered, and settlements reached by the Environmental Enforcement Section – and how does this compare to the first two years of the prior administration?

Domestic Terrorism and Civil Rights

The persistent threat of racially and religiously motivated violent extremism continues to plague the nation. Yet, the administration has appeared to endorse the actions of organizations like the Oath Keepers and Proud Boys through its January 6 clemency initiatives and attempts to establish financial reserves for their benefit. Under your watch, the department has effectively dismantled the National Security Division’s domestic terrorism portfolio and the Civil Rights Division’s Criminal Section.

• Given the loss of agents and lawyers responsible for combatting racially and religiously motivated violent extremism, how do you intend to address these threats going forward?