logo
What this Trump nominee says about his potential SCOTUS picks

What this Trump nominee says about his potential SCOTUS picks

Yahoo3 days ago

President Donald Trump's first term was marked by a contentious and ultimately wildly successful campaign to overhaul the federal judiciary — one that dominated the Senate floor calendar for nearly four years straight and occasionally exploded in partisan fury.
Now, with Trump dealing with unpredictable foreign crises and a sprawling domestic policy megabill, judge nominations have been almost an afterthought in the White House and on Capitol Hill.
That changed Wednesday, when Emil Bove — Trump's former personal lawyer, now a top Justice Department official — appeared for the Senate Judiciary Committee for a fiery hearing on his nomination to an appeals court judgeship.
The decision to nominate Bove, and the apparent willingness of Republican senators to fall in line behind him, suggests Trump is embracing a new kind of judicial pick as he continues to face significant resistance to his governing decisions in the federal courts.
Bove, 44, faced intense questioning from panel Democrats who pressed on his loyalty to the president as reflected not only in his private representation of Trump but his actions as principal associate deputy attorney general. Those include dismissing prosecutors tied to cases involving the Jan. 6 Capitol riot, ending the corruption prosecution of New York City Mayor Eric Adams and pursuing the administration's deportation agenda.
'Bove has led the effort to weaponize the Department of Justice against the president's enemies,' said Illinois Sen. Dick Durbin, the top Judiciary Democrat. 'Having earned his stripes as a loyalist to this president, he's been rewarded with a lifetime nomination.'
The tenor of Wednesday's hearing suggested that there is no detente in sight in the escalating partisan fight over federal judges, which reached a crescendo in 2018 with the searing confirmation battle over Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.
The only check on the rancor might be the fact that there are relatively few judicial vacancies for Trump to fill at the moment. According to the U.S. court system, there are just about 50 across the country, the vast majority of which are on district courts. The president's first slate of judicial nominees, including a pick for the 6th Circuit Court of Appeals, is poised to have a vote Thursday before the Judiciary Committee.
There are, however, three Republican-appointed Supreme Court justices 70 or over who are considered possible candidates for retirement over the next three-and-a-half years. Trump's willingness to nominate Bove — and to weather a hardball confirmation fight when a lesser-known nominee might have had an easier time — suggests he won't hesitate to tap another loyalist when a high-court slot opens up.
With a potential lifetime appointment to the 3rd Circuit, with jurisdiction over appeals from New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, and the Virgin Islands, Bove himself could emerge as a SCOTUS short-list candidate if confirmed.
The questioning Wednesday appeared to underscore the high stakes. Democrats questioned Bove about the pardons of Jan. 6 convicts and his role in the removal of the line prosecutors who sent them to jail.
The issue was effective in sinking one prior Trump nominee: his initial pick for U.S. attorney for the District of Columbia, Ed Martin. Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.), a Judiciary member up for next year, effectively tanked his chances by objecting to Martin's comments minimizing the Capitol riot. (Tillis said Wednesday he has not yet taken a position on Bove's nomination. 'Honestly I haven't discussed it with my staff yet,' he said.)
Democrats also seized on the Justice Department's decision to abandon the Adams prosecution — a controversial order from Bove himself that triggered the resignation of at least 6 prosecutors in New York and Washington. In her resignation letter, then-acting Manhattan U.S. attorney Danielle Sassoon accused Bove of engaging in a corrupt deal to drop the case in exchange for the Democratic mayor's support of Trump's immigration policies.
Asked during the hearing to swear to his 'higher being' that he didn't make a 'political deal' with Adams, Bove replied: 'I swear to my higher being and on every bone in my body.'
But Bove also said that he ordered the case dismissed based on 'policy considerations,' explaining that 'the prosecution placed an inordinate burden on the mayor's ability to protect the city and to campaign in an ongoing election cycle.'
Using that logic, Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.) said, 'there would be two classes of justice – one for people who are in office and one for everyone else.'
Bove also denied allegations from a former DOJ official that he suggested defying court orders for the administration's deportation agenda.
'I am not anybody's henchman,' Bove told senators. 'I am not an enforcer. I am a lawyer from a small town who never expected to be in an arena like this.'
Republicans rallied to Bove's defense, with the tone set early in the hearing by Judiciary Chair Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), who noted that the nominee had seen an 'intense opposition campaign' and extolled his credentials as a former prosecutor.
Democrats, on the other hand, cast the fight over Bove's nomination as one of grave significance for the rule of law, echoing a familiar fight from Trump's first term. Indeed, federal judges appointed by presidents of both parties have been some of the most effective checks on Trump's power early in his second term — much to the president's frustration.
Yet Democrats have little power to stop Trump's nominees so long as Republican senators stick together. With a 53-vote Senate majority, GOP leaders can lose several votes and still confirm Trump's picks with Vice President JD Vance as a tie-breaker.
Democrats also lack the benefit of the 'blue slip' policy that gives home-state senators effective veto power over court nominees. Republicans abandoned the practice for circuit judges during Trump's first term, one of the procedural changes in the Senate that allowed the party to confirm hundreds of judicial nominees during those four years. Democrats maintained the practice after they won control of the Senate and Joe Biden won the presidency.
Among those attending Wednesday's hearing were Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche — Bove's supervisors at the Justice Department. Blanche and Bove worked together as Trump's criminal defense attorneys, including during last year's criminal trial that resulted in his conviction on 34 felony counts of business fraud. Bondi defended Trump during his first impeachment trial.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) contended that Bondi and Blanche attended for the sole purpose of 'whip[ping] the Republicans into shape, to make sure that they toe the line.'
'They were there to send a message to Republicans: We are watching you,' Blumenthal said during a news conference after Bove's testimony. 'They were there to watch members of this committee, the Republicans, whom they expect simply to fall into line.'
Bove wasn't the only Trump nominee answering questions about his loyalty to the president Wednesday. Edward L. Artau, one of four district court nominees to also appear before Senate Judiciary members, was asked by Blumenthal why he did not recuse himself from a case involving Trump after he began lobbying for a federal judgeship.
POLITICO previously reported that Artau, a state judge, was lobbying for a seat on the federal bench while he sat on a three-judge panel in Trump's defamation case against the board of the Pulitzer Prizes.
Asked by Blumenthal why he did not recuse himself, Artau maintained that he abided by the relevant judicial conduct rule. He said he did not know he was under consideration from the White House at the time he wrote the opinion.
'Had the timing been differently, then I may have handled it differently,' Artau said.
Calen Razor contributed to this report.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Senate bill's Medicaid cuts draw some GOP angst
Senate bill's Medicaid cuts draw some GOP angst

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Senate bill's Medicaid cuts draw some GOP angst

The Senate's deep cuts to Medicaid in the tax and spending megabill are setting off alarm bells among some Republicans, complicating leadership's effort to get the legislation passed by July 4. It seeks to clamp down on two tactics states use to boost Medicaid funding to hospitals: state-directed payments and Medicaid provider taxes. The restrictions are a major concern for rural hospitals, a key constituency for senators. Republicans have set an ambitious July 4 deadline to pass the bill and send it to President Trump to be signed into law. Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.), who has been warning his colleagues about making cuts to Medicaid for weeks, said the changes took him by surprise. 'I had no idea that they were going to completely scrap the House framework with this. I mean, this totally caught me by surprise. And I've talked to other senators, and that's what I've heard consistently from everybody I've talked to, that no one was expecting this entirely new framework,' Hawley told reporters Tuesday. States impose taxes on providers to boost their federal Medicaid contributions, which they then direct back to hospitals in the form of higher reimbursements. Critics argue it's a scheme for states to get more federal funding without spending any of their own money. But provider taxes have become ingrained into states' Medicaid financing systems. States and provider groups say the taxes provide a steady source of financing for hospitals that operate on thin margins and would otherwise face closure. 'The draconian Medicaid cuts contained in the Senate bill would devastate health care access for millions of Americans and hollow out the vital role essential hospitals play in their communities,' said Bruce Siegel, president and CEO of America's Essential Hospitals, an organization that represents hospitals that serve low-income patients. The legislation would effectively cap provider taxes at 3.5 percent by 2031, down from the current 6 percent, but only for the states that expanded Medicaid under the Affordable Care Act. The cap would be phased in by lowering it 0.5 percent annually, starting in 2027. Nonexpansion states would be prohibited from imposing new taxes, but as was true in the House-passed version, their rates would be frozen at current levels. The lower cap would not apply to nursing homes or intermediate care facilities. All states except for Alaska finance part of their share of Medicaid funding through health care provider taxes, and 38 states have at least one provider tax that exceeds 5.5 percent. When asked if his concerns were enough to make him vote against the bill if it were brought to the floor as written, Hawley hedged. 'It needs a lot of work, so I would say maybe we could, I guess, try to fix it on the floor, but it'd be better to do it beforehand,' he told reporters. Republicans can afford to lose only three votes in the Senate and still pass their bill if Democrats remain united in opposition. Sen. Jim Justice ( said he was also surprised by the Senate's change. If provider tax changes are on the table, he said he wants leadership to keep the House version. Justice wouldn't say how he would vote if the provision was left unchanged but expressed some unease about the July 4 deadline. 'I promise you, I won't rubber-stamp anything,' Justice said. 'I want this thing to come out and come out quickly, but when it really boils right down to it, you may have to hold your nose on some things that you just absolutely don't like because we can't like everything.' Similarly, Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) indicated he would also prefer the House-passed freeze on provider taxes but was still analyzing the impact on his state. Louisiana expanded Medicaid in 2016. Senate Republican leaders huddled with members Tuesday during a closed-door caucus lunch to talk through the details of the bill. Speaking to reporters afterward, Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said leadership was listening to members' concerns, especially about provider taxes. 'We think [the changes] rebalance the program in a way that provides the right incentives to cover the people who are supposed to be covered,' Thune said. 'We continue to hear from members specifically on components or pieces of the bill they want to see modified or changed, and we are working through that.' Members were also briefed by Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services Administrator Mehmet Oz, who downplayed the impact of a lower provider tax cap. 'We do not believe that addressing the provider tax effort is going to influence the ability of hospitals to stay viable,' Oz told reporters. Without weighing in on the exact details, Oz said some changes to provider taxes and state-directed payments should be included. 'The framework of addressing the legalized money laundering with state-directed payments and provider taxes must be in this bill, it should be in this bill,' Oz said. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Tillis becomes third GOP senator to oppose Trump' s big, beautiful bill
Tillis becomes third GOP senator to oppose Trump' s big, beautiful bill

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Tillis becomes third GOP senator to oppose Trump' s big, beautiful bill

North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis (R) announced after a meeting with Senate GOP leaders and colleagues Saturday afternoon that he will vote 'no' on both the motion to proceed and final passage of the Republican megabill to implement President Trump's agenda because of deep cuts to federal Medicaid funding. Tillis said he wants Senate Republican leaders to drop their plan to lower the cap on healthcare provider taxes and instead embrace the Medicaid language passed by the House last month, which would cut much less federal funding in the program. 'Oh no. The data hasn't changed so I got to vote no,' he said. The North Carolina Republican said Senate leaders should return to 'starting with the House baseline.' 'I'm going to vote no on motion to proceed and on final passage,' he said. Tillis's strong opposition to the bill is a significant development because two other Republicans, Sens. Rand Paul (Ky.) and Ron Johnson (Wis.), have already said they will vote 'no.' That gives substantially more leverage to Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) and other swing-vote senators to demand changes to the bill. Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) can only afford three defections from his conference and still pass the bill with a tie-breaking vote from Vice President Vance given their 53-seat majority. Collins said she will vote Saturday to begin debate on the megabill but she says she wants to make several changes to it and is not guaranteed to vote 'yes' on final passage. 'I am planning to vote for the motion to proceed. Generally, I give deference to the majority leader's power to bring bills to the Senate floor. Does not in any way predict how I'm going to vote on final passage,' Collins told reporters Saturday. Tillis said he would help House Republican colleagues by 'defending their bill,' which would prohibit states that expanded Medicaid coverage under the Affordable Care Act from increasing health care provider taxes and barring states that did not expand the program from establishing new provider taxes. The Senate bill would cut more deeply into federal Medicaid funding for states by reducing the 6 percent cap on health care provider taxes by half a percentage point a year starting in 2028, reducing the cap down to 3.5 percent in 2032. States use healthcare provider taxes to collect more federal Medicaid funding, as the federal government matches what states collect in those taxes. Johnson, the Wisconsin senator, said in an interview with 'Fox & Friends Weekend' that he will vote against the motion to proceed to the bill on Saturday. 'I'm not going to vote for motion to proceed today. We just got the bill. I got my first copy about 1:23 in the morning, this morning,' he said. He said lawmakers have preliminary budget scores on less than half of the legislation. 'We don't even have the scores,' he said. 'We shouldn't take the [Rep.] Nancy Pelosi [(D-Calif.)] approach and pass this bill to find out what's in it,' he warned. 'We need to have a debate.' Paul, the Kentucky senator and other 'no' vote, has repeatedly said he will oppose the bill because it includes language to raise the debt ceiling by $5 trillion. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

‘We are not going to stand for this': Trump demands Israel drops ‘witch hunt' case against Netanyahu
‘We are not going to stand for this': Trump demands Israel drops ‘witch hunt' case against Netanyahu

News24

time2 hours ago

  • News24

‘We are not going to stand for this': Trump demands Israel drops ‘witch hunt' case against Netanyahu

Donald Trump demanded that Israel drop its corruption case against Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Trump hinted that the US would tie the case to US aid to Israel. Netanyahu and his wife Sara are accused of accepting more than $260 000 worth of luxury goods in exchange for political favours. US President Donald Trump on Saturday lashed out at prosecutors in Israel over the corruption trial that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has faced, saying Washington, having given billions of dollars worth of aid to Israel, was not going to 'stand for this'. Netanyahu was indicted in 2019 in Israel on charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust - all of which he denies. The trial began in 2020 and involves three criminal cases. 'It is INSANITY doing what the out-of-control prosecutors are doing to Bibi Netanyahu,' Trump said in a Truth Social post, adding that the judicial process was going to interfere with Netanyahu's ability to conduct talks with Palestinian militants Hamas, and Iran. Trump's second post over the course of a few days defending Netanyahu and calling for the cancellation of the trial went a step further to tie Israel's legal action to US aid. 'The United States of America spends Billions of Dollar a year, far more than on any other Nation, protecting and supporting Israel. We are not going to stand for this,' Trump said. READ | Trump demands Israel pardons 'great hero' Netanyahu, or abandons corruption case against him Netanyahu 'right now' was in the process of negotiating a deal with Hamas, Trump said, without giving further details. On Friday, the Republican president told reporters that he believed a ceasefire is close. Various sources/AFP Hamas has said it is willing to free remaining hostages in Gaza under any deal to end the war, while Israel says it can only end if Hamas is disarmed and dismantled. Hamas refuses to lay down its arms. Interest in resolving the Gaza conflict has heightened in the wake of the US and Israeli bombing of Iran's nuclear facilities. A ceasefire to the 12-day Israel-Iran conflict went into effect early this week. AFP reported that an Israeli court on Friday rejected Netanyahu's request to postpone giving testimony in his corruption trial, ruling that he had not provided adequate justification for his request. In one case, Netanyahu and his wife Sara are accused of accepting more than $260 000 worth of luxury goods such as cigars, jewellery and champagne from billionaires in exchange for political favours. In two other cases, Netanyahu is accused of attempting to negotiate more favourable coverage from two Israeli media outlets. AFP Netanyahu has denied any wrongdoing and has thanked Trump for his support in Israel's war with Iran, which saw a ceasefire agreement earlier this week. His lawyer had asked the court to excuse the leader from hearings over the next two weeks, saying he needs to concentrate on 'security issues'. Trump on Wednesday sprung to Netanyahu's defence, describing the case against him as a 'witch hunt'. On Saturday, he described Netanyahu as a 'War Hero' and said the case would distract the prime minister from negotiations with Iran and with Hamas, the Gaza-based Palestinian armed group that Israel is at war with. 'This travesty of 'Justice' will interfere with both Iran and Hamas negotiations,' said Trump, although it was unclear what negotiations he was referring to with regard to Iran. Yair Palti/Anadolu via Getty Images The US leader also likened Netanyahu's legal troubles to his own before he took office for his second term. 'It is a POLITICAL WITCH HUNT, very similar to the Witch Hunt that I was forced to endure,' said Trump. The Republican was convicted on 34 counts of falsifying business records in May 2024 in a case related to hush money payments to a porn star. Trump also faced two federal cases, one related to his alleged efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, which he lost to Democrat Joe Biden.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store