Blanche Rescinds $1.8 Billion Fund as Cornyn and Tillis Back His Attorney General Nomination; Trump Audit Immunity Stays
How left and right are reading this
- Both agree
- A rescission that one signature created and one signature undid binds nothing, and two departing senators calling it sufficient satisfies neither read of what was actually secured.
- They split on
- Whether the story is about audit immunity still shielding Trump, his sons and his company's filed returns, or about $1.8 billion that a confirmed Blanche can stand back up.
The Facts
- Blanche, the acting attorney general, signed a document released late Sunday formally rescinding the May 18 order that established the $1.8 billion "anti-weaponization" fund.
- Republican Sens. John Cornyn of Texas and Thom Tillis of North Carolina, who had held up the nomination over the fund and the tax audit immunity deal, announced Aug. 3 that they would support Blanche; both are leaving the Senate in January.
- The audit immunity covering Trump, his two eldest sons and the Trump Organization remains in place, with Blanche stating it applies only retroactively to filings already made and not to future tax filings.
- The audit immunity was struck as part of a deal to resolve Trump's $10 billion lawsuit against the Internal Revenue Service.
- The fund was intended to compensate people who say they were victims of politically motivated prosecution, a group that could have included Jan. 6 defendants whom Trump pardoned at the start of his second term.
- With the two senators' support, the Senate Judiciary Committee was expected to advance Blanche's nomination on Aug. 4 to the full Senate, where Republicans hold 53 seats.
- Legal experts and Democratic senators said Blanche's order does not prevent him from reviving the fund or creating a similar one after confirmation, and leaves the audit protections for past tax years intact.
- Blanche's confirmation is not assured in the full Senate, with GOP senators including Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska not yet committed, and Democrats opposed over his ties to Trump and his handling of the Epstein files release.
Context
What was the "anti-weaponization fund" supposed to do?
The Justice Department moved in May to establish a fund of roughly $1.8 billion — described in some accounts as $1.776 billion — to make taxpayer-funded payments to people who said they were targeted by politically motivated prosecutions under previous administrations, a pool that could have included Jan. 6 rioters pardoned by Trump NBC News,Northwest Arkansas …,American Prospect,Yahoo.
Why do critics say the rescission may not be permanent?
Commentators across the spectrum questioned the order's durability. University of North Carolina law professor Carissa Byrne Hessick wrote that she saw nothing in the letter that would stop Blanche from reviving the fund once confirmed, and former U.S. Attorney Barb McQuade called the order "hollow"; Mike Howell of the conservative Oversight Project said it "can be undone after Tuesday" Forbes. Democratic Sen. Alex Padilla said nothing in the document stops the department from using taxpayer money for such payments and that the IRS protections for past years remain intact New Republic,Yahoo.
How unusual is the tax audit arrangement?
Tax lawyers interviewed by Forbes said a blanket exemption from audit covering all of a taxpayer's prior returns has no precedent; the IRS may agree to foreclose future audits of a disputed return, but former Tax Policy Center analyst Steve Rosenthal said, "I have never seen anything like it" Forbes. The Associated Press reported the arrangement retains the potential to erase millions of dollars in Trump's back taxes Yahoo! Finance.
Facts first. Then every angle.
The day’s biggest stories in one short brief — the facts everyone agrees on, then the competing values behind the headlines. Free in your inbox.
View all 128 sources
Wire services (8)
Independent coverage (50)
About these frames
See this differently than someone you know would? Two ways to keep it going.
The dial works on any URL — paste an article you read elsewhere this week.