It’s not often that the word fuck comes up at a Senate confirmation hearing. But Sen. Adam Schiff (D–Calif.) said it six times during the Senate Judiciary Committee’s June 25 hearing on President Donald Trump’s nomination of Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove to serve on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 3rd Circuit.
Schiff was not using that expletive to express his dismay at Bove’s nomination, which the Republican-controlled committee voted to advance on Thursday despite credible concerns about Bove’s respect for the rule of law. Rather, Schiff was quoting Justice Department whistleblower Erez Reuveni, who alleges that Bove, during a March 14 meeting about Trump’s invocation of the Alien Enemies Act (AEA) to summarily deport alleged gang members, “made a remark concerning the possibility that a court order would enjoin those removals before they could be effectuated.” According to Reuveni, Bove “stated that DOJ would need to consider telling the courts ‘fuck you’ and ignor[ing] any such court order.”
That account goes to the heart of the objections raised by critics of Bove’s nomination, who include conservatives as well as progressives. Ed Whelan, former president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, has expressed “serious doubts that Bove has the character and integrity to be worthy of confirmation as a federal judge.” The Wall Street Journal‘s editorial board worries about Bove’s “reputation…as a smashmouth partisan who wields the law as a weapon.” New York Times columnist David French warns that Bove’s nomination reflects Trump’s preference for “judges who will do whatever it takes to curry favor with a president who values fealty above all.”
Reuveni’s account, which is backed up by contemporaneous internal communications, powerfully reinforces those concerns about Bove. When Bove suggested that the Justice Department could simply ignore any court orders against the AEA removals, Reuveni says, “others in the room looked stunned,” there were “awkward, nervous glances,” and “silence overtook the room.” But “notwithstanding Bove’s directive,” Reuveni “left the meeting understanding that [the Justice Department] would tell [the Department of Homeland Security] to follow all court orders.”
That understanding proved to be mistaken. The next day, the Trump administration began sending alleged members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua to a notorious prison in El Salvador, despite an injunction issued that day by James Boasberg, chief judge of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. Boasberg later concluded that the evidence “strongly support[s]” the conclusion that the government’s lawyers “willfully disobeyed” his order.
That conduct was consistent with another message that Reuveni says Bove delivered during that March 14 meeting. According to Reuveni, Bove “stressed to all in attendance that the planes [transporting AEA detainees] needed to take off no matter what.”
When Schiff asked Bove about those alleged remarks, the nominee was notably evasive. “I have no recollection of saying anything of that kind,” Bove said, referring to the “fuck you” quote. “I’ve certainly said things encouraging litigators at the department to fight hard for valid positions that we have to take in defense of our clients….I did not suggest that there would be any need to consider ignoring court orders. At the point of that meeting, there were no court orders to discuss.”
Schiff pressed Bove: “Did you suggest telling the courts ‘fuck you’ in any manner?” Bove did not deny it. “I don’t recall,” he said.
When Schiff asked Bove whether he had in fact “stressed to people in attendance that the planes needed to take off no matter what,” Bove implicitly admitted saying something along those lines. “I certainly conveyed the importance of the upcoming operation,” he said. “I don’t recall the specific words that I used.”
Schiff suggested that response was not credible: “Wouldn’t you recall saying that if you had instructed that the planes needed to take off no matter what, including whether the court ordered otherwise?” That summary was “a mischaracterization,” Bove replied, because “there were no court orders at this point.”
Attorney General Pam Bondi portrays Reuveni as a “disgruntled employee” who is “asserting false claims” and “seeking five minutes of fame.” He was fired in April after he admitted in court that Kilmar Abrego Garcia, who was deported to El Salvador despite a court order barring the government from sending him there, had been removed due to an “administrative error.” As Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche told it, Reuveni had failed to “follow a directive” from his superiors, failed to “zealously advocate” on behalf of the U.S. government, and engaged in “conduct prejudicial to [his] client” by conceding that Abrego Garcia had been deported by mistake. White House Deputy Chief of Staff Stephen Miller described Reuveni as a “Democrat” and “saboteur.”
Reuveni’s work history tells a different story. As his attorneys noted in a June 24 letter to the Senate Judiciary Committee, the Justice Department’s inspector general, and the U.S. Office of Special Counsel, Reuveni served as a DOJ lawyer for nearly 15 years in both Republican and Democratic administrations, doggedly defended Trump’s immigration policies during his first administration, received excellent performance reviews, and was promoted several times. On the same day that Bove made the remarks he says he can’t recall, Reuveni was promoted to acting deputy director of the Justice Department’s Office of Immigration Litigation (OIL). He says he was fired because he insisted that government lawyers have an obligation to be truthful in court and cannot defy judicial orders.
Given that background, Reuveni seems like a credible source, and he has evidence to back up his account of what Bove said. On the evening of March 15, Reuveni texted his immediate boss, August Flentje, OIL’s acting director. “Guess it’s find out time on the ‘fuck you,'” he wrote. “Yup,” Flentje replied. “It was good working with you.”
In another text exchange with Flentje four days later, Reuveni again alluded to the March 14 meeting. “At this point,” Reuveni said, “why dont [sic] we just submit an emoji of a middle finger as our filing,” adding, “a picayune middle finger.” Flentje again seemed to understand the reference, replying, “So stupid.”
On April 5, the day Reuveni was placed on administrative leave because of his candor in Abrego Garcia’s case, he texted Flentje, noting “you were at a certain meeting too.” Flentje’s reply: “I believe I told our host we would not violate a court order. I think there is definitely a through line from that meeting to where we are today.”
That “through line” is the Trump administration’s willingness to defy court orders when they obstruct the president’s agenda. Bove’s apparent embrace of that attitude should disqualify him from his current position, let alone a seat on a federal appeals court.
There are other reasons to worry about Bove’s suitability for the latter job. Bove, a former federal prosecutor, earned Trump’s favor by representing him in the state and federal criminal cases he faced in 2023 and 2024. As a top Justice Department official, Bove played a central role in the dismissal of corruption charges against New York Mayor Eric Adams—a decision that provoked a revolt by federal prosecutors, who resigned rather than participate in what they perceived as an unethical quid pro quo: Adams would avoid prosecution by cooperating with Trump’s immigration crackdown.
The fact that Bove sought to have the charges against Adams dismissed without prejudice, meaning the mayor could be prosecuted again at the government’s discretion, lent credibility to that characterization. Dale Ho, the federal judge overseeing the case, refused to let the Justice Department hold that sword over Adams’ head. Ho credited the dissenting prosecutors’ take on the situation, saying, “Everything here smacks of a bargain: dismissal of the Indictment in exchange for immigration policy concessions.”
That episode also came up during Bove’s confirmation hearing. So did his decision to dismiss dozens of prosecutors who had worked on the criminal cases against Trump supporters who invaded the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2021.
In all these cases, Bove has proven himself a tireless Trump advocate, and the president evidently expects him to continue that role as a federal appeals court judge. “Emil is SMART, TOUGH, and respected by everyone,” Trump wrote on Truth Social when he announced Bove’s nomination. “He will end the Weaponization of Justice, restore the Rule of Law, and do anything else that is necessary to MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN. Emil Bove will never let you down!”
That seems like an impossible mission, since it entails irreconcilable goals. A judge who is prepared to do anything that is necessary to help Trump implement his agenda will have to look the other way when the president tries to do something illegal or unconstitutional. Otherwise, he is bound to let Trump and his supporters down, at least occasionally. We can have either the rule of law or everything that Trump wants; we cannot have both. Bove’s record suggests how he is inclined to resolve that problem.
reason.com (Article Sourced Website)
#Judicial #nominee #Emil #Bove #recall #DOJ #fuck #court #orders