Exclusive: Acting AG Todd Blanche Was Told Last Year to Recuse From Justice Department Matters Involving Trump
Exclusive – Less than two weeks after Todd Blanche assumed the role of deputy attorney general in March 2025, the Justice Department’s top ethics lawyer presented him with a critical decision: to step away from legal cases involving President Donald Trump in his personal capacity. This directive, delivered by Joseph Tirrell, marked the first time Blanche was formally informed of his need to recuse, according to a former senior Justice ethics official who shared details with CNN. The official described the meeting as a straightforward yet pivotal moment, emphasizing the ethical weight of the requirement.
The Recusal Process
Blanche and his then-top deputy, Emil Bove, were handed a printed PowerPoint presentation outlining the ethics guidelines. The document highlighted that recusal is not just a procedural formality but a significant step in the Trump era, where such decisions can trigger political backlash. Tirrell, the official who led the briefing, explained that Blanche’s prior representation of Trump in criminal prosecutions meant he had to avoid conflicts of interest in ongoing investigations. The ethics pledge he signed included a one-year restriction from participating in matters related to past clients of the Blanche Law Group.
“He is recused from many cases before DOJ. In any cases that are still ongoing where he previously represented someone, he is recused,” said a Justice Department spokeswoman.
The department’s regulations specify that recusal is mandatory if a lawyer has a personal or political connection to individuals involved in an investigation. Blanche’s case exemplifies this rule, as his involvement in Trump’s defense in two federal court cases—both dismissed before resolution—now requires him to maintain distance from similar matters. This creates a unique situation where he is both a former advocate and a current overseer of the same legal processes.
Consequences of Recusal
Recusal in the Trump administration carries significant risks. Former Attorney General Jeff Sessions faced intense scrutiny after stepping down from the Mueller investigation, illustrating how such moves can be politically charged. For Blanche, the choice is stark: remain in charge of investigations the president deeply cares about, potentially undermining their credibility in court, or recuse himself and risk Trump’s disapproval. The dilemma reflects a broader tension between loyalty to the administration and impartiality in legal proceedings.
Inside the Justice Department, the shuffle of personnel has intensified. Blanche’s appointment as acting attorney general has placed him at the center of a complex ethical landscape. His previous role as Trump’s defense lawyer in criminal cases has now shifted him to a position of oversight, where he must evaluate the same legal system that once worked against his former client. This transition has led to questions about his objectivity, particularly as he now investigates officials who were once part of Trump’s legal team.
Brennan’s Case and the Broader Investigation
The current investigation into former CIA director John Brennan is a key focus for Blanche. Trump has made Brennan a primary target, alleging that he played a role in efforts to undermine the 2020 election. DiGenova, a former US attorney for DC, has been installed to lead this probe, framing it as a sweeping conspiracy spanning from the 2017 Russian election interference probe to the 2024 Special Counsel Jack Smith prosecutions. DiGenova’s involvement adds a layer of complexity, as his legal expertise and ties to the Trump administration may influence the investigation’s direction.
Despite this, Blanche has not fully recused himself from Brennan’s case. Last week, a spokesperson confirmed this, though the department has remained silent on other details. The ongoing probe raises concerns about whether Blanche’s prior advocacy for Trump could cloud his judgment in assessing Brennan’s actions. This scenario underscores the challenges of recusal in cases where personal and political connections are intertwined.
Historical Context and Legal Implications
Blanche’s recusal is not an isolated event but part of a larger pattern within the Justice Department. The agency’s internal shakeup has seen a shift in priorities, with cases against Trump’s allies now taking center stage. The 2020 election-related prosecutions, which Blanche once defended, now appear as potential targets for scrutiny. This reversal highlights the dynamic nature of political investigations and the role of recusal in maintaining institutional balance.
The Office of Government Ethics has been a focal point in these discussions. Blanche’s ethics pledge, submitted to the office, outlines his commitment to avoiding conflicts of interest. However, the one-year recusal period for past clients of the Blanche Law Group means he must now distance himself from cases involving individuals like Brennan, who were central to Trump’s legal battles. This creates a paradox: a lawyer who once stood as a bulwark against Trump’s adversaries now leads the charge against them.
Meanwhile, the Justice Department’s public acknowledgment of Blanche’s recusal marks a shift in transparency. While they have not detailed which specific cases he is stepping away from, the recognition of his recusal signals a growing awareness of ethical considerations. This aligns with the department’s broader efforts to navigate the challenges of overseeing investigations that have political ramifications.
“To the extent DOJ is investigating something related to the President for which Todd was previously representing him, then hypothetically yes, he would recuse,” added a Justice Department spokeswoman after publication.
The process of recusal, however, remains a hypothetical for now. Blanche’s position as acting attorney general allows him to retain oversight of key cases, provided he adheres to the guidelines. This duality—simultaneously representing Trump and investigating those who sought to challenge him—raises questions about the scope of his responsibilities and the potential for bias.
The Path Forward
As the investigation into Brennan and others progresses, the Justice Department faces the challenge of balancing accountability with the risk of recusal. Blanche’s decision to recuse from certain cases may be seen as a necessary step to ensure impartiality, but it also underscores the delicate position he occupies. The recent appointment of diGenova has further complicated this dynamic, with his focus on uncovering a broad conspiracy against Trump potentially influencing the investigation’s outcome.
Inside the Justice Department, the pressure to act decisively is mounting. Blanche’s recusal from cases involving Trump’s past clients has been a defining moment, but the broader implications of his role remain under scrutiny. The agency’s internal structure now reflects a new era of investigations, where the line between political loyalty and legal neutrality is continually tested. As the case against Brennan unfolds, the question of whether Blanche’s recusal is sufficient to ensure fairness will be a key point of debate.
Ultimately, Blanche’s situation exemplifies the ethical quandary faced by officials in high-stakes political environments. His ability to navigate this tension will determine the perception of the Justice Department’s investigations as either rigorous or politically motivated. The decision to recuse from certain cases is not just a legal requirement but a strategic move that shapes the narrative of the Trump administration’s legacy in the eyes of the public and the courts.
