Federal Courts and Nominations

Blumenthal, et al. v. Whitaker

Holding President Trump accountable for evading the Senate’s advice-and-consent role through his designation of Matthew Whitaker to serve as Acting Attorney General.

Case Summary

On November 7, after months of signaling his displeasure with Attorney General Jeff Sessions over Mr. Sessions’ perceived lack of loyalty, President Donald J. Trump asked him to resign. Even though Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein, who would be Acting Attorney General under the DOJ succession statute, is available to exercise the functions and duties of the office of Attorney General, President Trump designated Sessions’ chief of staff, Matthew Whitaker, to serve as Acting Attorney General. The U.S. Senate has not given its consent to Mr. Whitaker serving as Attorney General (or any other principal Officer position in the United States).

CAC, along with co-counsel Protect Democracy, filed a complaint for declarative and injunctive relief on behalf of Senators Richard Blumenthal, Sheldon Whitehouse, and Mazie K. Hirono. Our complaint alleges the President’s designation of Mr. Whitaker to perform the functions and duties of the office of Attorney General violates the Constitution’s Appointments Clause.  As the complaint explains, had Mr. Whitaker been formally nominated to serve as a principal Officer within the Department of Justice, members of the Senate would have had the opportunity to consider public comments he has made criticizing and proposing to curtail ongoing DOJ investigations that implicate the President, his espoused legal views, and his affiliation with a company that is under criminal investigation for defrauding consumers. It is precisely so that matters like these can be thoroughly examined by Senators that the Constitution prohibits the appointment of principal federal Officers without the Senate’s advice and consent. That safeguard, the Framers recognized, helps prevent the President from appointing Officers with “no other merit than that of . . . possessing the necessary insignificance and pliancy to render them the obsequious instruments of his pleasure,” The Federalist No. 76 at 458 (Alexander Hamilton) (Clinton Rossiter ed., 1961).

Case Timeline

  • November 19, 2018

    CAC and Protect Democracy file a complaint on behalf of U.S. Senators

    D.D.C. Original Complaint
  • February 19, 2019

    CAC and Protect Democracy file notice voluntarily dismissing the case after a new Attorney General is confirmed

More from Federal Courts and Nominations

Federal Courts and Nominations
August 11, 2026

Discussion on Todd Blanche’s confirmation, data centers, and Missouri’s primary election results.

Rising Up With Sonali
CAC Vice President Praveen Fernandes joined Sonali Kolhatkar on the Rising Up with Sonali podcast...
Federal Courts and Nominations
August 8, 2026

CAC Release: Confirmation of Todd Blanche as Attorney General is a Loss for the American People

WASHINGTON, DC – In response to the Senate’s vote on Todd Blanche’s nomination to serve...
By: Praveen Fernandes
Federal Courts and Nominations
August 6, 2026

Sign-On Letter: Blanche’s documents do not solve problems with Trump v. IRS or his nomination

The Honorable John Thune Majority Leader United States Senate Washington, D.C. 20510 The Honorable Chuck...
Federal Courts and Nominations
August 7, 2026

Leadership Conference Sign-On Letter Opposing Confirmation of Todd Blanche

Reject the Confirmation of Todd Blanche as U.S. Attorney General Dear Senator: The Leadership Conference...
Federal Courts and Nominations
August 4, 2026

CAC Release: Blanche AG Nomination Moves to Senate Floor, Where It Should Be Rejected

WASHINGTON, DC – In response to the Senate Judiciary Committee’s vote on Todd Blanche’s nomination...
By: Praveen Fernandes
Federal Courts and Nominations
July 30, 2026

CAC Release: Concerns Prompting Committee Delay Should Also Prompt Rejection of Blanche Nomination

WASHINGTON, DC – In response to the Senate Judiciary Committee’s postponement of a vote on...
By: Praveen Fernandes