GOP Senators Most Likely to Vote Against Todd Blanche for Attorney General

Todd Blanche, President Donald Trump's nominee for United States attorney general after Pam Bondi was fired in April, faces skepticism from several Republican senators ahead of his confirmation battle.

Trump formally nominated Blanche to lead the Department of Justice (DOJ) this week, but some Republican senators have expressed concerns, specifically over the administration's proposed anti-weaponization fund, which Blanche said earlier this month would be dropped.

The deputy attorney general, Blanche is serving as the acting attorney general, a role he assumed after Trump fired Bondi amid the fallout from the administration's handling of the Epstein files. His nomination will first go through the Senate Judiciary Committee, where a single Republican "no" vote could sink it, as no Democrats are expected to vote for him.

He was already confirmed for his current position, but backlash over the anti-weaponization fund could complicate his path forward, with centrists and Trump foes having raised concerns about his nomination.

Key Senators to Watch Ahead of Blanche Confirmation Battle

Several senators have been sharply critical of Blanche over the fund and are viewed as potential swing votes, though none have explicitly ruled out voting for his confirmation. Newsweek reached out to each of these senators for comment via email.

Bill Cassidy, Louisiana

Cassidy, who last month lost a Senate primary after Trump endorsed one of his opponents, has indicated he isn't committed to voting in favor of Blanche, according to The Shreveport Times.

“I have to be convinced [Blanche] is going to be the attorney general as opposed to being the president’s personal attorney. The attorney general is supposed to work for all of us," he told reporters.

Cassidy lost in his reelection bid, with Trump-endorsed Representative Julia Letlow and John Fleming instead advancing to a runoff. Cassidy was among the handful of Republicans who voted to convict Trump following his impeachment over the January 6, 2021, riot at the U.S. Capitol.

Susan Collins, Maine

Collins, a centrist who has been willing to break from the party and vote against some of Trump's nominations, is always watched as a key vote in Cabinet confirmations. She has been among the more critical Republicans of the anti-weaponization fund, pressing Blanche about it during a hearing last month. Collins said in remarks reported by The Hillthat she believes the administration's position on the fund has been "rather confusing."

Collins is also viewed as the most vulnerable Republican senator in this year’s midterms, representing a state Trump lost by 7 percentage points in 2024. She faces a challenge from progressive Democrat Graham Platner. In a race in which she needs to win over some Democratic voters, she will need to create some space between herself and Trump over the coming months.

John Cornyn, Texas

Like Cassidy, Cornyn lost his reelection bid in the primary to a Trump-backed conservative, state Attorney General Ken Paxton. He has not committed on whether or not he will support Blanche's nomination.

"The problem with the office of Attorney General is that there’s basically, well, you are a member of the president’s Cabinet,” he told Punchbowl News. “But you’re also the chief law enforcement officer for the country. And you’re not the president’s lawyer. So I’ll be asking some questions about getting commitments on that."

Josh Hawley, Missouri

Hawley has also not committed to advancing the nomination, telling Politico he has questions about whether Blanche would settle lawsuits about mifepristone, a pill used to terminate pregnancies.

Mitch McConnell, Kentucky

McConnell, who has voted against the Trump administration at times and is not seeking another term in office, criticized the fund, writing in a statement last month to Punchbowl News: "So the nation's top law enforcement official is asking for a slush fund to pay people who assault cops? Utterly stupid, morally wrong – Take your pick."

Lisa Murkowski, Alaska

Murkowski, a moderate, told Roll Call that she is concerned about the fund but has not ruled out voting for him.

"I think there's several aspects about the fund and how it was created, and then kind of how it was announced," she said.

Thom Tillis, North Carolina

Tillis, who is retiring, has said he will be looking at Blanche's comments about January 6 as a possible "circuit breaker" ahead of his confirmation.

“They better not have said for one minute that the people who beat up police officers, like these right down here, were righteous people,” Tillis said in remarks reported by Fox News. “You come even close to saying that, you don't have a [chance] of getting my vote in Judiciary.”

Timeline: How Todd Blanche's Nomination Took Shape

• April 2, 2026: Attorney General Pam Bondi is fired following disputes over prosecutions involving Trump's political opponents and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche is named acting attorney general.
• May 18, 2026: Blanche announces plans for a $1.8 billion "anti-weaponization" compensation fund.
• May 29, 2026: A federal judge temporarily blocks the fund.
• June 2, 2026: Blanche tells Congress that the department will abandon the proposal following bipartisan backlash.
• June 4, 2026: Trump announces his plan to nominate Blanche as attorney general.

Anti-Weaponization Fund Backlash Explained

The Trump administration's anti-weaponization fund was designed to compensate people who claimed they were unfairly targeted by government investigations. Blanche framed it as a response to what Trump and his allies have described as "lawfare," but it drew swift, bipartisan backlash.

Critics raised concerns that it could allow compensation for those convicted of crimes connected to the January 6, 2021, Capitol riot, including those found guilty of assaulting police officers. Blanche declined to publicly rule out such eligibility.

The DOJ described it as a "systematic process to hear and redress claims of others who suffered weaponization and lawfare."

Trump and other Republicans have accused former President Joe Biden’s DOJ of weaponizing the law against conservatives during his term, highlighting prosecutions against Trump and individuals involved in the January 6 riot as examples of weaponization. Many legal experts, however, say there was no weaponization, viewing those examples as legitimate prosecutions.

During a hearing with senators last month, Blanche defended the fund as "unusual" but "not unprecedented” while stressing that anyone, not just Republicans, can apply.

It also drew a legal challenge from U.S. Capitol Police Officer Harry Dunn and Metropolitan Police Department Officer Daniel Hodges, who were at the U.S. Capitol on January 6.

"The Fund's mere existence sends a clear and chilling message: those who enact violence in President Trump's name will not just avoid punishment, they will be rewarded with riches,” the complaint reads.

Where Does Anti-Weaponization Fund Stand?

Blanche has said the administration is no longer moving forward with the fund. On Wednesday, U.S. District Judge Richard Leon rejected a government watchdog's request for a court order blocking the fund. The administration argued that it is moot because Blanche told lawmakers the plan would be scrapped.

Leon warned the administration: "Don't play possum with the court." He said he will consider a separate request by Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington for a preliminary injunction to block payouts.

2026 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.

This story was originally published June 11, 2026 at 12:38 PM.