Todd Blanche entered the Justice Department with the résumé of an experienced prosecutor and defense lawyer. But former colleagues say those credentials are not enough for the nation’s top law-enforcement job if the holder cannot keep politics out of the work.
That warning is now sharper after a series of decisions under Blanche’s watch as deputy attorney general and acting attorney general. In the view of two former Southern District of New York prosecutors writing in www.ms.now, his recent actions show a willingness to use DOJ power in ways that benefit President Donald Trump rather than the public.
Why former SDNY prosecutors are speaking out
Mimi Rocah and Perry A. Carbone say they worked alongside Blanche for years in the Southern District of New York and once considered him a close friend. They describe SDNY as a place where prosecutors were expected to pursue cases independently, regardless of politics, wealth, or status.
Their criticism is not about whether a president can set law-enforcement priorities. It is about whether the Justice Department can still act with the independence needed to keep public trust in its decisions.
The IRS settlement that triggered alarm
The clearest flashpoint came this week, when a federal judge overseeing Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS said the case was brought for an improper purpose. The judge referred government attorneys, including Blanche, to state bar agencies for possible disciplinary review.
| Issue | What Happened | Why It Matters |
|---|---|---|
| Trump IRS lawsuit | Judge said it was brought to gain judicial legitimacy for a settlement with no viable basis in law or fact | Raised concerns about self-dealing and misuse of DOJ authority |
| Blanche’s role | He announced a settlement and signed an addendum involving immunity for Trump and his family on older tax claims | Suggested DOJ powers were used to benefit Trump personally |
| “Anti-weaponization” fund | The proposed $1.776 billion fund was to be shared by Trump with supporters | Deepened doubts about whether the arrangement served the public interest |
According to the article, Blanche helped facilitate the lawsuit against an agency controlled by the president and then treated it as a settlement. The former prosecutors argue that this was not an exercise of independent judgment, but an effort to help Trump personally.
Trump’s influence over prosecutions
Blanche has also been explicit about Trump’s influence over federal investigations. In an April press conference, he said Trump has a “right” and a “duty” to shape probes involving people who had investigated him.
That position has already shown up in high-profile cases. Blanche has overseen indictments of people publicly criticized by Trump, including a second indictment of former FBI Director James Comey for a “threat” made via seashells.
He also oversaw dismissals tied to Proud Boys convictions connected to the Jan. 6, 2021, attack on the Capitol. A judge appointed by Trump later said those dismissals were made “without regard to the seriousness of the conduct at issue,” and made clear they were sought because Trump wanted them.
The broader institutional concern
Rocah and Carbone say their objection is shared by more than 1,200 other DOJ alumni who opposed Blanche’s nomination. Their concern is not partisan, they write, but institutional: whether the Justice Department will continue to serve the American people and preserve confidence in its work.
That is the standard Blanche would face if confirmed as attorney general. The former prosecutors’ case is that his record already shows the opposite of the independence the job requires.