Blanche says DOJ opinion on executive privilege is not 'any novel legal concept'
The Hill · C · trust 44/100
Comments: by Ryan Mancini - 08/16/26 9:53 AM ET Comments: Link copied by Ryan Mancini - 08/16/26 9:53 AM ET Comments: Link copied NOW PLAYING Attorney General Todd Blanche on Sunday dismissed criticism over the Justice Department’s (DOJ) recent opinion on executive privilege over communications between the president and “private advisors” outside of government, saying that it is not “any novel legal concept.”
“Fox News Sunday” host Shannon Bream played a clip to Blanche of Rep. Robert Garcia (D-Calif.) telling MS NOW that the DOJ’s opinion is “about hiding corruption. “It’s about allowing the president to do whatever he wants to do.”
Blanche dismissed this, saying it was “just clarifying” the existing opinion from the DOJ’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC).
“We have to let a president feel like he can have frank conversations with individuals and get honest feedback about running this country without the risk of being used by him and others, like what you just heard in a way that’s inappropriate,” Blanche said. “And so this wasn’t any novel legal concept.”
The attorney general added that even if an advisor is not being paid to advise the president, “if you’re providing the right type of advice, there are circumstances where it should absolutely be privileged.”
“And this was not some new legal theory, like some on the left are saying,” he reiterated. “It was just an expansion and kind of clarification of existing legal concepts.”
The move was interpreted as a signal that the Trump administration is looking at how to respond to what could likely be a barrage of investigations spearheaded by Democrats if they retake the House.
The OLC said in its Monday opinion that the opinion is not absolute and that the president can only assert executive privilege for discussions with outside advisors who are “limited to communications ‘in performance of [a President’s] responsibilities,’ ‘of his office,’ and made ‘in the process of shaping policies and making decisions.'”
This follows the OLC’s determination in April that the White House should not have to comply with the Presidential Records Act, which mandates the broad preservation of White House records, including communications between staff.
A federal judge ordered President Trump and his administration the following month to comply with the law, citing “the original public meaning of the text of the Constitution, canons of interpretation, Supreme Court precedent, general principles of property law, and almost 50 years of practice.”
Read the original at The Hill →
Open in TruthVane →