The Senate teed up its next major confirmation battle as the Judiciary Committee weighed the nomination of Emil Bove, President Trump’s former personal defense attorney, for a lifetime circuit court judgeship.
Bove, now the principal associate deputy attorney general, has been at the center of a series of controversies during his brief tenure at the Justice Department – episodes listed by Democrats who oppose his nomination.
It was Bove who gave the order to dismiss prosecutors who worked on the cases of Jan. 6 rioters. He also demanded a list of FBI agents who worked on such cases.
And it was Bove who signed a motion asking to drop charges against New York Mayor Eric Adams, after several career prosecutors resigned rather than end the case.
Wednesday’s hearing was also dominated by accusations made in the whistleblower complaint of a recently fired career Justice Department lawyer who said Bove told prosecutors in a meeting that they might rebuff court orders and consider saying “f— you” to judges.
The remarks reportedly came amid plans to send migrants to a megaprison in El Salvador. The whistleblower complaint accuses Bove of saying the Department of Homeland Security should be prepared to carry out flights even if a court intervened and blocked them.
“There is no scenario under which the White House Counsel could believe that this nomination would be acceptable. …I don’t even understand how we are seriously considering someone for a lifetime appointment on the federal bench who has such disregard for court orders,” said Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) of Bove’s nomination to the Third Circuit Court of Appeals.
“He should be before us in an oversight hearing on the unlawful acts of this Department of Justice. He should be before us to account for what we have seen going on in a very unusual way. He should not be before us for a lifetime appointment to the federal bench,” Booker said, adding that they should call the whistleblower before the panel.
Bove swiftly acknowledged the controversy surrounding his nomination.
“I am someone who tries to stand up for what I believe is right. I’m not afraid to make difficult decisions. I understand that some of those decisions have generated controversy,” he said.
“I respect this process, and I’m here today to address some of your questions about those decisions, but I want to be clear about one thing up front, there is a wildly inaccurate caricature of me in the mainstream media. I am not anybody’s henchman. I’m not an enforcer. I’m a lawyer from a small town who never expected to be in an arena like this.”
Bove was less candid when asked about explosive allegations from a Tuesday whistleblower complaint accusing Bove of preparing to flout potential court orders.
Bove initially said he had “no recollection of saying anything of that kind,” prompting Sen. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) to repeat the expletive.
“It seems to me that would be something you’d remember, unless that’s the kind of thing you say frequently,” Schiff said.
“I’ve certainly said things encouraging litigators at the department to fight hard for valid positions that we have to take,” Bove responded.
The whistleblower filing comes after Erez Reuveni was fired shortly after telling a judge that Kilmar Abrego Garcia was mistakenly removed due to an administrative error.
Reuveni’s role also included fighting challenges to Alien Enemies Act removals conducted in March, and his complaint notes that Bove, anticipating that courts would likely halt the flights, indicated the planes must take off no matter what.
That indeed happened, and Reuveni’s complaint also alleges that Trump DOJ officials were not open with U.S. District Court Judge James Boasberg about the status of flights set to take off carrying more than 100 men to the prison. Reuveni’s complaint states lawyers repeatedly failed to convey information about the planned flights and that his notices to the Department of Homeland Security to ground the flights went unanswered.
Boasberg later found there was probable cause to hold the Trump administration in criminal contempt for willfully disobeying his order to immediately halt deportations.
Bove noted that the meeting happened before there were any challenges or court orders in the case, but when further pressed by Schiff if he said the planes should take off no matter what, the nominee dodged the question.
“I certainly conveyed the importance of the upcoming operation,” Bove said.
The timing of Reuveni’s complaint ahead of the hearing was noted by Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), who called it a “coordinated political strike” on Bove.
“Turning every nominee into a political punching bag isn’t advice and consent, it’s smear and obstruct – and that’s a distortion of the constitutional design,” he said.
The Justice Department has attacked the complaint, with Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche calling it “falsehoods purportedly made by a disgruntled former employee and then leaked to the press in violation of ethical obligations.”
He also called it “a false hit piece the day before a confirmation hearing.”
In some cases, Bove gave direct answers to questions about his most contentious decisions.
Bove said “yes” it was policy considerations that motivated the dismissal of Adams’s bribery case, as the Trump administration said the mayor would cooperate with the immigration enforcement planned in the city.
“Policy reasons made it appropriate to drop the charges,” Bove said.
The Trump administration wanted to dismiss the charges without prejudice – leaving the potential for criminal prosecution hanging over Adams.
The decision prompted a wave of resignations from eight prosecutors, including one who had previously clerked for former Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia.
Durbin at the hearing cast the move as a way to control Adams, noting that a judge eventually allowed the case to be dismissed with prejudice, barring future charges.
“You could no longer have the mayor on a leash making sure that he follows the president’s immigration policies,” he said.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) implied the dismissal of the Adams charge was an improper quid pro quo and referenced that case, as well as the directive to fire Jan. 6 prosecutors, as the basis for Bove’s nomination.
“The quid pro quo was a nomination to the Court of Appeals. That’s the appearance that the American people can take away from your sitting before us with that nomination,” he said.
Bove defended the firing of Jan. 6 prosecutors, calling it a management decision after some attorneys were transferred to work on such cases.
But Durbin called it an affront to Bove’s support of law enforcement.
“Both things can be true,” Bove said in response.
“I did and continue to condemn unlawful behavior, particularly violence against law enforcement. At the same time, I condemn heavy-handed and unnecessary tactics by prosecutors and agents.”
Bove’s close relationship with Trump was also under the microscope. Booker questioned whether he would be an impartial judge who would uphold the law independently from the Trump administration.
“I’m wondering where the lines are for you. What’s the line in the sand when you wield awesome power of government? What is that line for you? Because clearly lying to a court isn’t a red line. Refusing to follow court orders isn’t a line. Doxing judges and government officials isn’t a red line; Intimidating attorneys you supervise into doing things they believe is unethical, is not a line. So what’s your red line?” Booker asked.
“I really wonder, what could the president ask you to do that you wouldn’t do?”
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to The Hill.
