OMITTED

What the news leaves out.

← Omitted front page

Todd Blanche confirmation hearing grills ICE and immigration records

14 sources · updated 2026-07-17
Left 100% Center 0% Right 0%
2 left · 0 center · 0 right

What happened

On July 16, 2026, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a confirmation hearing for Todd Blanche, President Donald Trump’s nominee for attorney general and the acting attorney general since April; Blanche had previously served as Trump’s personal defense lawyer. Senators questioned Blanche about Justice Department independence, the department’s handling of Jeffrey Epstein records and redaction errors, subpoenas issued to New York Times journalists, FBI Director Kash Patel, records obtained by former special counsel Jack Smith’s team from lawmakers, and a Trump-IRS settlement that created a proposed $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization” fund while protecting Trump, his family and his businesses from IRS audits of past returns. Blanche told senators the fund was “dead” and that no money had been paid out, while also confirming the settlement remained an enforceable contract. Immigration enforcement was part of the surrounding scrutiny: after ICE agents fatally shot Lorenzo Salgado Araujo in Houston and Joan Sebastian Guerrero in Biddeford, Maine, the Department of Homeland Security directed a temporary suspension of ERO-initiated vehicle stops, and Trump then posted that ICE should continue using “THE TRAFFIC STOP.” Mexico also formally asked U.S. state attorneys general to criminally investigate deaths of Mexican immigrants in ICE custody or enforcement operations, citing 17 Mexican deaths since the start of Trump’s second term.
Omitted — what each side leaves out

Unpacked

The biggest factual gap runs through the IRS settlement. NPR says the $1.776 billion anti-weaponization fund was created in Trump’s IRS lawsuit settlement, that Blanche called it dead, but that the part protecting “Trump, his family and his businesses from IRS audits of past tax returns remains in place.” NPR also says Cornyn pressed Blanche into confirming the settlement is still “an enforceable contract.” Slate similarly says Blanche signed a deal giving Trump and his family/businesses audit immunity. Breitbart mentions the fund, but frames it as meant to “compensate individuals unfairly investigated by the government during the Biden years” and quotes Blanche saying “the weaponization fund is dead”; it does not mention the audit protection or enforceable-contract point. Newsmax’s Blanche hearing story does not cover the fund at all. ICE is another asymmetrical area. Guardian reports Mexico asked state attorneys general to criminally investigate immigrant deaths in ICE custody or raids, and gives the count: “17 Mexican immigrants” have died since Trump’s second term began, “14 in ICE custody and three in agency operations.” Axios reports Trump reversed a DHS suspension of ICE vehicle stops after fatal shootings in Maine and Houston, says neither target was the intended target, and cites at least “22 people” shot at by ICE agents, with “six” killed, including “three U.S. citizens.” The right-leaning pieces do not include those ICE-death figures or Mexico’s investigation request; Breitbart’s separate ICE item instead centers a Canadian woman in ICE custody after allegedly assaulting a juvenile Trump supporter. The Epstein language diverges sharply. NPR calls the women behind Blanche “victims of the convicted sex offender” and says DOJ failed to properly redact “victims’ private information and photos.” Newsmax, through Dershowitz, uses distancing language: “people who say they were victimized,” “people who claim they’re survivors or victims,” and even “We don’t know whether they’re survivors, victims, complicitous.” The right also carried a Jack Smith records angle the left barely developed. Newsmax says Grassley asked Blanche to investigate records showing Smith’s team reviewed texts involving “dozens of lawmakers,” and quotes Rep. Russ Fulcher calling it a “separation of powers, illegal search.” Slate only notes Blanche seemed open to investigating Jack Smith; the Fulcher phone, “44” lawmakers, and filter-team claims are absent. One question left unanswered across the board: whether DOJ, under Blanche, will take any specific action on ICE shooting or custody-death investigations beyond receiving complaints or running the already mentioned FBI inquiry in Maine.
Bottom line

The coverage split was not just tone: Guardian and Axios supplied ICE-death numbers such as “17 Mexican immigrants” and “22 people” shot at, while Newsmax supplied the “44” lawmakers/Jack Smith phone-records allegation that left-leaning accounts largely skipped.

The Left View
Left-leaning sources frame the hearing as a test of whether Blanche can separate the Justice Department from Trump’s personal and political interests. They emphasize his prior role as Trump’s lawyer, his hearing answer “I’m his lawyer” before correcting himself, the still-enforceable Trump-IRS settlement, and allegations that the department has pursued Trump adversaries while giving Trump legal benefits. They also highlight bipartisan discomfort over the “anti-weaponization” fund, the Epstein-records redaction failures, Blanche’s reluctance to personally meet Epstein victims, subpoenas to New York Times journalists, and former pardon attorney Liz Oyer’s claim that Blanche is running DOJ as “Donald Trump’s personal law firm.” On ICE, left-leaning coverage treats the recent deaths, Mexico’s request for investigations, and Trump’s insistence on traffic stops as evidence that immigration enforcement tactics are producing accountability and human-rights questions that Blanche’s DOJ may have to confront.
The Right View
Right-leaning sources frame Blanche as a qualified nominee who withstood hostile or “bullying” questioning and defended a department he says is “restoring trust.” They stress his answers that the anti-weaponization fund is “dead,” that no money moved, and that the DOJ has been “extraordinarily transparent” on Epstein records compared with the Biden administration. They also present Kennedy’s questioning as normalizing a president choosing a trusted attorney general, highlight Blanche’s defense of Kash Patel against what he called an “extraordinarily obnoxious” question, and cite Alan Dershowitz’s view that an attorney general generally meets with lawyers rather than alleged victims personally. Right-leaning coverage also uses the Jack Smith records issue to support the broader claim that the real DOJ problem is prior “weaponization,” including alleged improper access to lawmakers’ communications during Trump-related investigations.
Our Take (balanced)
The strongest left argument is that Blanche’s independence problem is not merely biographical: it is supported by the Trump-IRS settlement, the proposed fund’s enforceable-contract status, press subpoenas, politically charged investigations, Epstein-records failures, and his own “I’m his lawyer” correction during the hearing. The strongest right argument is that the hearing did not establish misconduct sufficient to disqualify him: Blanche gave specific assurances that the fund is not moving forward, defended DOJ access to Epstein materials, offered a conventional legal rationale for not personally meeting represented claimants, and faced legitimate questions about prior investigative overreach involving Jack Smith’s team. The central unresolved tension is whether Blanche’s DOJ is correcting perceived Biden-era politicization or extending presidential control over federal law enforcement in a way that undermines the department’s independence.

14 sources

The week's bottom lines, in your inbox

One email a week: the five stories that mattered and what they actually mean. Free.