Trump lawyer and DOJ enforcer faces confirmation hearing for federal judgeship
For the past six months, Bove has served as a high-ranking official in the Justice Department. In that short time, he has proven himself to be a reliable ally for the president and also been embroiled in a series of major controversies – including dropping federal charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams; investigating officials who worked on cases related to January 6, 2021; and pursuing Trump's deportation goals in ways that prompted a whistleblower to allege Bove intended to ignore court orders and mislead federal judges.
A Senate Judiciary Committee confirmation hearing Wednesday will be the first time Democratic lawmakers will have the chance to grill the reclusive Bove on his time at the Justice Department and his work for Trump. If confirmed, Bove would be one of roughly a dozen judges with the power to review federal cases being appealed in Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Delaware and the Virgin Islands.
Despite his involvement in high-profile cases and controversies, Bove has mostly avoided the limelight.
'He has been right there but kind of in the shadows, he doesn't go on TV, he doesn't talk to the press,' a senior Justice Department official told CNN. 'He is a brilliant lawyer, he is just an amazing writer, critical thinker … he clerked for two rock star judges, he worked at Sullivan and Cromwell. He is a legit genius lawyer, but nobody knows who he is.'
Bove graduated from Georgetown Law School in 2008 and then went on to spend a decade working as a federal prosecutor in the Southern District of New York, where he focused on international terrorism and narcotics cases.
During that time Bove successfully brought narco-terrorism charges against Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro in 2020. He also prosecuted Ahmad Khan Rahimi, the man responsible for a 2016 pressure cooker bombing in New York that left 30 people injured. Rahimi was convicted and sentenced to life in prison.
A former colleague who worked with Bove describes him as an 'a**-kicker … he is whip smart, has a high level of curiosity, is naturally intelligent, and extremely effective.'
'I wouldn't want to be one of his adversaries,' they said.
Bove joined Trump's legal team in 2023 and worked on three of Trump's criminal cases over the span of roughly 18 months. He sat second chair, alongside now-Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche, to represent Trump in his New York hush money trial. Trump was ultimately found guilty on 34 counts of falsifying business records in that case, which he is still appealing.
He also worked on Trump's federal criminal cases related to alleged mishandling of classified documents and allegations of interfering with the 2020 election.
Bove's resume has many of the hallmarks of a federal judge, but he has never served on the bench, and it is unclear how he would rule on major issues.
'He is completely empathic and fair – he is very strategic and thoughtful about applying law to the facts. He is a brilliant writer and critical legal thinker. He will make opinions that come out of the third circuit tighter and better,' the senior Justice Department official said.
But some Senate Democrats are not convinced and want to focus Wednesday's hearing on Bove's controversial actions while at the Trump Justice Department.
Just hours after Trump took office, Bove was tapped to assume the powerful position of interim deputy attorney general – the No. 2 job at the Justice Department, which had him running the sprawling agency while Attorney General Pam Bondi and Deputy Attorney General Blanche were awaiting confirmation.
His brief tenure has earned him many detractors as he tried to reshape the department to align with Trump's vision and clashed with career officials.
One of Bove's first actions at the department was to issue a memo threatening to prosecute state and local officials who resist the administration's federal immigration crackdown.
'The administration had a directive to depoliticize the department. He was met with instant resistance from entrenched bureaucrats who are not accustomed to change,' his former colleague told CNN. 'He was there to execute a mission and institute policy – he was not there to make friends.'
He then ordered the firing of eight senior officials and sent a memo demanding information about all current and former employees who had any involvement in January 6 investigations.
The request became a point of contention between the FBI and DOJ, sparking two lawsuits that aimed to stop the collection or release of any such information, saying that its release would put FBI employees in danger.
His most high-profile controversy has been dropping federal corruption charges against Adams.
Adams was charged in September 2024 with five federal charges of bribery, wire fraud and conspiracy and soliciting campaign contributions from foreign nationals.
In a memo to prosecutors in February, Bove cited two reasons as to why the case should be dropped: It had been tainted by publicity, and it was preventing Adams from doing his job, which included helping Trump with his immigration crackdown.
Federal prosecutors at first rebuffed his demand to drop the case, and some quit in protest, including the interim US Attorney in Manhattan, Danielle Sassoon, and the acting chief of the public integrity section of the department.
Bove ended up personally arguing for the case to be dismissed. Judge Dale Ho ultimately agreed to do so in April 2025.
Bove's handling of the Adams case has been the focus of many of the objections to his judicial nomination.
Even the conservative The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board wrote Tuesday, '… his recent handling of the case against New York May Eric Adams doesn't inspire confidence.'
Justice Connection, a coalition of former Justice Department officials, released a video on Monday with statements from formal federal prosecutors warning the public of Bove's alleged unlawful practices.
Ryan Crosswell, a federal prosecutor for more than a decade, was one of the lawyers who resigned over the case.
'We don't bring charges or dismiss them based on political loyalties. Emil Bove asked us to base a prosecutorial decision not on the facts, not on the law, but on a political calculation,' Crosswell says in the video.
'He took on a hard job the first five weeks of the administration doing what the president was elected to do,' said the senior Justice Department official. 'Whether someone is qualified to be a judge is not determined by what they did over five-to-six-week period of administration.'
Bove has also drawn scrutiny for his approach to executing the president's aggressive goals on immigration.
On Tuesday, Erez Reuveni, the former acting deputy director for the Office of Immigration Litigation, sent a whistleblower letter to members of Congress and independent investigators in the executive branch regarding Bove's alleged conduct.
Reuveni was an immigration attorney who lost his job after working on the case of mistakenly deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia.
He complained internally about the department's lack of respect towards the court which ultimately led to him being removed. Reuveni also claims that Bove told prosecutors in a meeting in March that the Justice Department could ignore court orders, and that the department could tell the courts, 'f**k you.'
In the wake of these controversies, the Justice Department points to accomplishments that have occurred under Bove's leadership, including securing the transfer of 29 cartel leaders to face charges in the US. Bove was also a part of the Justice Department team that worked with the DEA to execute the largest fentanyl seizure in history.
But his former colleague says Bove's varied experience is what makes him perfect for the federal bench.
'He has seen it from both sides – he has worked in a federal prosecutors' office, he has worked at DOJ, and he worked in the private sector and defended people targeted by the federal government,' they said. 'He is attuned to overreach. He is exactly who you would want on federal bench.'
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Boston Globe
21 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Russia and Ukraine trade drone strikes as Kyiv signs deals to boost drone production
Russian air defenses shot down 120 Ukrainian drones during the nighttime attacks, and 39 more before 2 p.m. Moscow time (7 a.m. EST) Sunday, Russia's Defense Ministry said. It did not clarify how many had hit targets or how many had been launched in total. Advertisement Early Sunday, Ukrainian drones injured two civilians in Russia's Belgorod region near the border, its Gov. Vyacheslav Gladkov said. The Ukrainian attacks came just days after Russia pummelled Kyiv with waves of drones and missiles overnight into Friday, in what Ukrainian officials called the largest such strike since Moscow's all-out invasion. The seven-hour onslaught killed at least two civilians, wounded dozens more, and caused widespread damage, Ukraine said, while Moscow In total, Russia launched 550 drones and missiles across Ukraine that night, according to the country's air force. The barrages have coincided with a concerted Russian effort to break through parts of the roughly 1,000-kilometer (620-mile) front line, where Ukrainian troops are under severe pressure. Advertisement Large-scale Russian drone strikes Sunday injured three civilians in Kyiv and at least two in Kharkiv, Ukraine's second-largest city in the northeast, officials said. A Russian attack involving Shahed drones also targeted port infrastructure in Mykolaiv in central Ukraine, according to local Governor Vitaliy Kim. He reported that warehouses and the port's power grid were damaged, but there were no casualties. Hours later, Russia launched a glide bomb and a drone at the front-line town of Kostyantynivka in eastern Ukraine, killing four civilians and injuring a fifth, the prosecutor's office said. The drone struck a car in which a married couple were travelling, killing the 39-year-old woman and 40-year-old man on the spot, it said. Zelensky said Saturday that Ukraine had inked deals with European allies and a leading US defense company to step up drone production, ensuring Kyiv receives 'hundreds of thousands' more this year. Zelensky did not name the US business in his nightly video address to Ukrainians, but said Ukraine and Denmark have also agreed to co-produce drones and other weapons on Danish soil. His remarks came days after the US Ukraine has previously used homemade drones to hit high-value military targets deep inside Russia, demonstrating its capabilities and denting Moscow's confidence. Last month, Advertisement Outmanned and outgunned, Ukraine's army has also turned to drones to compensate for its troop shortage and shore up its defenses. While Russia has Friday, Zelensky said he had a 'very important and productive' phone call that day with President Trump, discussing possible joint drone production alongside Trump said his phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin Thursday left him 'very disappointed,' adding he did not think Putin was serious about ending the fighting.
21 minutes ago
Trump admin's crackdown on pro-Palestinian campus activists faces federal trial
BOSTON -- A federal bench trial begins Monday over a lawsuit that challenges a Trump administration campaign of arresting and deporting faculty and students who participated in pro-Palestinian demonstrations and other political activities. The lawsuit, filed by several university associations against President Donald Trump and members of his administration, would be one of the first to go to trial. Plaintiffs want U.S. District Judge William Young to rule the policy violates the First Amendment and the Administrative Procedure Act, a law governs the process by which federal agencies develop and issue regulations. 'The policy's effects have been swift. Noncitizen students and faculty across the United States have been terrified into silence," the plaintiffs wrote in their pretrial brief. 'Students and faculty are avoiding political protests, purging their social media, and withdrawing from public engagement with groups associated with pro-Palestinian viewpoints,' they wrote. 'They're abstaining from certain public writing and scholarship they would otherwise have pursued. They're even self-censoring in the classroom.' Several scholars are expected to testify how the policy and subsequent arrests have prompted them to abandon their activism for Palestinian human rights and criticizing Israeli government's policies. Since Trump took office, the U.S. government has used its immigration enforcement powers to crack down on international students and scholars at several American universities. Trump and other officials have accused protesters and others of being 'pro-Hamas,' referring to the Palestinian militant group that attacked Israel on Oct. 7, 2023. Many protesters have said they were speaking out against Israel's actions in the war. Plaintiffs single out several activists by name, including Palestinian activist and Columbia University graduate Mahmoud Khalil, who was released last month after spending 104 days in federal immigration detention. Khalil has become a symbol of Trump 's clampdown on campus protests. The lawsuit also references Tufts University student Rumeysa Ozturk, who was released in May from a Louisiana immigration detention. She spent six weeks in detention after she was arrested walking on the street of a Boston suburb. She claims she was illegally detained following an op-ed she co-wrote last year that criticized the school's response to Israel's war in Gaza. The plaintiffs also accuse the Trump administration of supplying names to universities who they wanted to target, launching a social media surveillance program and used Trump's own words in which he said after Khalil's arrest that his was the 'first arrest of many to come.' The government argued in court documents that the plaintiffs are bringing a First Amendment challenge to a policy 'of their own creation.' 'They do not try to locate this program in any statute, regulation, rule, or directive. They do not allege that it is written down anywhere. And they do not even try to identify its specific terms and substance,' the government argues. 'That is all unsurprising, because no such policy exists.' They argue the plaintiffs case also rest on a 'misunderstanding of the First Amendment, 'which under binding Supreme Court precedent applies differently in the immigration context than it otherwise does domestically." But plaintiffs counter that evidence at the trial will show the Trump administration has implemented the policy a variety of ways, including issuing formal guidance on revoking visas and green cards and establishing a process for identifying those involved in pro-Palestinian protests. "Defendants have described their policy, defended it, and taken political credit for it," plaintiffs wrote. 'It is only now that the policy has been challenged that they say, incredibly, that the policy does not actually exist. But the evidence at trial will show that the policy's existence is beyond cavil.'
Wall Street Journal
23 minutes ago
- Wall Street Journal
Asian Markets Fall as Tension Rises Ahead of Tariff Deadline
Asian stock markets and U.S. futures were in the red Monday, as remarks by President Trump stirred up already-tense markets bracing for tariffs to hit dozens of countries this week. Trump took to Truth Social to announce that 'tariff letters and/or deals' will be delivered starting Monday, and threatened an additional levy on countries aligned with Brics. Brics is a group of countries including Brazil, Russia, India and China.
