[[link removed]]
[[link removed]]
Judicial Nominees
Over the past two days, the Senate Judiciary Committee held a hearing for Todd Blanche, nominated to become the next attorney general. During the hearing, Senator Kennedy asked [[link removed]] Blanche about his relationship with Trump, and Blanche immediately replied, “I’m his lawyer." Though he quickly corrected himself, Blanche’s answer provides insight into his intentions: he is in power to serve Trump's interests. Undoubtedly, Blanche will lead the Department of Justice with this ethos as his guide.
Blanche’s track record shows his commitment to serving Trump. Blanche was confirmed as deputy attorney general in March 2025 and has served as acting attorney general since former Attorney General Pam Bondi’s removal in April 2026. Unsurprisingly, Blanche’s tenure at the Department of Justice continues to be mired in corruption and controversy. Blanche has always been regarded as Trump’s loyal fixer: pre-DOJ, he represented Trump in a personal capacity [[link removed]] when Trump faced state and federal criminal charges. Since his appointment to the DOJ, Blanche attempted to create a slush fund [[link removed]] for Trump to use at his whim and botched investigations into Jeffrey Epstein’s sex trafficking network [[link removed]] of underage girls and the killings [[link removed]] of everyday people by ICE. Time and again, Blanche has demonstrated that he will go to great lengths to carry out Trump’s authoritarian agenda, harming anyone who stands in his way. He is unfit and unqualified to serve as attorney general and will undoubtedly continue to weaponize the Justice Department, leaving a legacy of harm and destruction.
[[link removed]]
During his tenure at the DOJ, Blanche fired hundreds of career employees, often for unlawful reasons. Several employees were fired for working on cases Trump did not approve of, for being related to Trump’s enemies, for declining to initiate political prosecutions, or for refusing to lie in court. There has also been an unprecedented number of departures and resignations among its nonpartisan career staff. Blanche’s action violated civil service statutes and damaged public trust in the DOJ, eliminating critical support and justice services for everyday people.
Regarding federal judicial nominees, earlier this morning the Senate Judiciary Committee voted to advance five nominees: Daniel Traynor [[link removed]] (8th Circuit), Angela Colmenero [[link removed]] (Southern District of Texas), Kasdin Mitchell [[link removed]] (Northern District of Texas), Michael Martin [[link removed]] (Eastern District of Michigan), and Anthony Pozos [[link removed]] (Eastern District of Pennsylvania). The Senate also confirmed Arthur Jones [[link removed]] (Southern District of Texas), Jeffrey Kuntz [[link removed]] (Southern District of Texas), and Matthew Schwartz [[link removed]] (2nd Circuit) earlier this week.
Schwartz is another Trump loyalist, with a demonstrated history of shielding Trump from accountability for his misconduct. In addition to acting as Trump’s personal lawyer, Schwartz has defended racist lending practices, personally attacked DEI and its role in universities, and has expressed extreme bias against reproductive care. He has repeatedly demonstrated that he does not have the discernment, temperament, or independence to serve on such a powerful court.
[[link removed]]
At the beginning of July, AFJ launched a new resource [[link removed]] dedicated to a potential Supreme Court vacancy. This resource provides extensive background information on the possible nominees should a vacancy occur. Some of the most notable potential nominees are highlighted below:
Andrew Oldham [[link removed]] : Currently a judge on the 5th Circuit, Oldham spent his pre-judicial career attacking the Voting Rights Act, opposing racial justice protections under the Fair Housing Act, and defending Texas laws that cut off access to abortion.
Neomi Rao [[link removed]] : Currently a judge on the D.C. Circuit, Rao has consistently demonstrated extreme and dangerous ideological opinions, including the belief that survivors of sexual assault bear responsibility for violence committed against them if they drink alcohol or fail to exercise control over their “sexuality.”
James Ho [[link removed]] : Currently a judge on the 5th Circuit, Ho’s writings and decisions demonstrate a deliberate effort to posture for a Supreme Court nomination. More recently, he reversed his opinion on the constitutionality of birthright citizenship, seemingly to raise his standing with Trump.
[[link removed]]
[[link removed]]
Earlier this week, Judge Kathleen Williams handed down a remarkable decision [[link removed]] that accused [[link removed]] Trump, his lawyers, and attorneys for the DOJ (including acting attorney general Blanche) of inappropriately manipulating the court system when the DOJ settled Trump’s lawsuit against the IRS, resulting in a lifetime shield from IRS scrutiny for Trump and his family and a $1.8 billion slush fund for Trump’s political allies, including January 6 insurrectionists. Williams stopped short of completely invalidating the settlement, but held [[link removed]] that the government cannot claim in official proceedings that the agreement was the result of a legitimate legal process. She also sanctioned [[link removed]] two of Trump’s personal lawyers who were involved in the case. Additionally, Williams suggested [[link removed]] that Blanche and Associate Attorney General Stan Woodward may be subject to investigative or disciplinary action by state bar associations and sent her ruling to the state bars of New York and the District of Columbia, where both Blanche and Woodward are barred. Williams’s extraordinary decision represents the potential first step in undoing this corrupt settlement.
Two weeks ago, two federal judges blocked [[link removed]] a Trump ⁠administration order that would have excluded public service workers from federal student loan forgiveness if the administration determined their organizations have a “substantial illegal purpose.” The order aimed to narrow eligibility for the Public Service Loan Forgiveness program (“PSLF”), which forgives [[link removed]] federal student loans for borrowers who have worked for nonprofit organizations for 10 years. The program has forgiven $62.5 billion in loans for over 871,000 individuals and has been proven to increase [[link removed]] nonprofits’ ability to fulfill their missions in their communities.
While Trump claimed the program misdirects funds to organizations that threaten national security, numerous states, cities, and nonprofits challenged [[link removed]] the order, arguing it targeted groups supporting immigrant rights, civil rights, and transgender health care. New York Attorney General Letitia James, who helped lead the lawsuit, described it as a “ political loyalty test [[link removed]] ” intended to turn the program into a “ weapon for political retaliation [[link removed]] .”
This was also clear to U.S. District Judges Myong Joun and Amir Ali, who both blocked [[link removed]] the order in separate cases. Both judges found that the PSLF unambiguously designates all nonprofits with 501(c)(3) tax-exempt status as eligible. Consequently, both judges determined that the Education Department had no legal authority to change the criteria. Judge Joun further noted [[link removed]] that the order violated the First Amendment by targeting politically disfavored groups engaged in free speech. These rulings constitute an important roadblock as the Trump administration seeks to suppress groups working against its extremist agenda. AFJ previously supported [[link removed]] Ali’s elevation to the federal bench in 2024.
Holding Court
Alliance for Justice is inviting you to join us on Thursday, July 16, from 2:30 – 3:30 PM ET for Holding Court: SCOTUS Review — The Power of Dissent . This will be a timely conversation discussing the most consequential decisions and dissents of the U.S. Supreme Court’s (SCOTUS) 2025-2026 term. Moderated by AFJ’s own Federal Research and Advocacy Director Christine Zinner , the event will feature Jess Braverman [[link removed]] , Legal Director at Gender Justice and Imani Gandy [[link removed]] , Executive Producer of Legal Content at Rewire News Group and host of the B*tch, Listen! podcast [[link removed]] . Christine, Jess, and Imani will be breaking down the opinions, while also discussing how some of the progressive dissents can help lay the groundwork for future legal battles and rulings.
Holding Court: SCOTUS Review — The Power of Dissent will take place via StreamYard and streamed through AFJ’s YouTube channel and LinkedIn page.
You can sign up to listen to the conversation here [[link removed]] .
Not yet receiving AFJ Insider? Sign up to join us here [[link removed]] .
Donate today to help us keep up The Benchline [[link removed]]
[[link removed]]
[link removed] [[link removed]] [link removed] [[link removed]] [link removed] [[link removed]] [link removed] [[link removed]] [link removed] [[link removed]] www.afj.org [www.afj.org]
If you believe you received this message in error or wish to no longer receive email from us, please unsubscribe: [link removed] .
Alliance for Justice
11 Dupont Circle NW
Suite 500
Washington, DC 20036
United States