DDF and LDAD Appeal the New York Attorney Grievance Committee’s Refusal to Open Investigation into Acting Attorney General Todd Blanche
July 24, 2026
The Committee recently sent notice that it would take no action on the complaint “at this time” and suggested complainants file with the DOJ, a decision that undermines the rule of law.
WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, Democracy Defenders Fund and Lawyers Defending American Democracy filed a formal request for reconsideration with the New York Attorney Grievance Committee, urging the chair of the committee to reverse the chief attorney’s recent refusal to open an investigation of acting Attorney General Todd Blanche.
On June 22, DDF, LDAD and a bipartisan group of over 100 retired federal and state judges filed a complaint seeking an investigation of Blanche by the committee. The committee’s chief attorney responded that they “will take no action in this matter at this time.” Instead, the chief attorney directed the complainants to the Department of Justice’s own Office of Professional Responsibility.
As the request for reconsideration explains, however, OPR lacks the independence to conduct a credible review. If the committee defers to OPR, it will fail to address a documented pattern of unethical conduct by Blanche. This includes Blanche’s central role in the collusive settlement of Trump v. IRS, involving the creation of an unprecedented, illegal $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization” slush fund agreement and a general release of liability for President Trump, his family and his business entities.
Most importantly, the committee’s refusal to investigate at this time also ignores significant judicial findings already on the record regarding Blanche’s conduct. In support of an immediate investigation, the request highlights the recent order issued by U.S. District Judge Kathleen Williams in Trump v. IRS that found Todd Blanche and the Department of Justice colluded with President Trump to improperly use the court system to give credence to the $1.776 billion “anti-weaponization” slush fund agreement. Judge Williams directed that a copy of her order be sent to the AGC for consideration, as part of an investigation of the complaint, specifically linking to the complaint filed by DDF, LDAD and the judges.
This request for reconsideration also highlights that the Department of Justice’s OPR lacks the authority and independence to meaningfully review complaints against the acting attorney general. As the request explains, the Office of Professional Responsibility, which has been without a lead counsel for months, reports directly to the attorney general and the deputy attorney general. The result is that Todd Blanche or a DOJ official that reports to him would be reviewing and making decisions about an ethics complaint against him in his official role at DOJ.
Finally, the request explains that the McDade Amendment, which mandates that DOJ attorneys remain subject to state ethics rules “to the same extent and in the same manner” as all other attorneys, clearly provides the committee with the authority and mandate to investigate DOJ attorneys like Blanche.
“The chief attorney’s one-page letter declining to open an investigation into Todd Blanche fails to grapple with the real world effects of that decision,” said Amb. Norm Eisen (ret.), co-founder and executive chair of Democracy Defenders Fund. “Any OPR investigation would be fundamentally tainted by organizational and personal conflicts of interests and ultimately futile. This is the emblematic case in which accountability delayed is accountability denied. At this point, DOJ’s internal mechanisms are unfortunately subject to capture and there is no serious prospect of accountability during the Trump regime. We hope the committee will rethink their approach.”
Scott Harshbarger, co-founder and board chair of Lawyers Defending American Democracy, stated that the chief attorney’s letter sends the wrong message to other disciplinary authorities throughout the country: “Public trust and confidence in our justice system is dependent upon lawyers adhering to their oath and complying with the applicable Rules of Professional Conduct. If state disciplinary authorities are unwilling to hold government lawyers to the same requirements that every other lawyer must follow, then the system has failed.”
Read the request for reconsideration letter here.
Read the letter from the AGC here.
Read the initial complaint from DDF and LDAD here.
# # #
Democracy Defenders Fund brings together a nonpartisan team to work with national, state and local allies across the country to defend in real-time the foundations of our democracy.
Lawyers Defending American Democracy is a coalition of lawyers united in the defense of our democracy and committed to galvanizing the legal profession – and the public – to protect the rule of law.
