CNN
—
President Donald Trump’s former personal attorney, Emil Bove, was pushed to repeatedly deny several accusations of corruption – one made by a whistleblower at the Justice Department – during his confirmation hearing Wednesday before the Senate Judiciary Committee.
“I am not anybody’s henchman,” Bove said. “I’m not an enforcer. I’m a lawyer from a small town, who never expected to be in an arena like this.”
Trump has nominated several of his personal attorneys to top legal posts in his administration, but his nomination of Bove to the 3rd US Circuit Court of Appeals marks the first time he has selected one of his lawyers to serve on the federal bench.
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.
Bove testified on Wednesday that the decision to drop charges against Adams was based on a “substantiated” concern “on the weaponization of the criminal justice system” in the case, though he did not elaborate.
He also cited concerns “about the effect” of the prosecution on Adams’ ability to govern and campaign.
Sen. Richard Blumenthal lambasted Bove for not further explaining those decisions when pressed during the hearing, including over questions of whether there was an element of quid pro quo in dropping the charges.
“I am absolutely flabbergasted that you would come before this committee and refuse to tell us basic facts about a case that is at the core of the challenges to the appearance of impropriety that should disqualify you,” the Connecticut Democrat said.
“You were virtually the only attorney in the Department of Justice willing to go to court and make a claim that career prosecutors said violated their basic standard of ethics, and the quid pro quo was a nomination to the Court of Appeals,” Blumenthal added.
Bove was also pushed repeatedly to address allegations made in a recent whistleblower complaint reported on Tuesday.
The whistleblower complaint, filed by a recently fired DOJ attorney and sent to members of Congress, alleges that in a meeting in March, Bove “stated that DOJ would need to consider telling the courts ‘f**k you’” and ignore any orders to stop the hasty deportation of migrants to a prison in El Salvador.
During his opening statements and in response to several questions from senators during Wednesday’s hearing, Bove continued to deny allegations of wrongdoing.
“I don’t think there’s any validity to the suggestion that that whistleblower complaint filed yesterday calls into question my qualifications to serve as a circuit judge,” Bove said.
The hearing Wednesday was the first time Democratic lawmakers had 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’s roots
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.
Bove joins justice
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.
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.”
Embraces textualism
Unlike some other judicial nominees, particularly those to appellate courts, Bove doesn’t have a record of judicial writings that would ordinarily give lawmakers and the public a view into his legal beliefs and principles.
On Wednesday, Bove testified that if confirmed to the bench he would adhere to a conservative judicial philosophy in which jurists read the law for its plain meaning without considering legislative history and other factors.
Asked by Missouri GOP Sen. Josh Hawley what his general approach would be when reviewing an “ambiguous” statute, Bove explained that he would employ a so-called textualist reading of the law in question – embracing a judicial philosophy championed by the late Justice Antonin Scalia, a giant of the conservative legal movement.
“I would consult the context of the operative phrase, consider the statutory structure, look at usages of similar terms by the operative legislature at the time in question … and try to garner as much as can be from those sources, those textual indications,” Bove explained.
He continued: “In the event that I think that those textual considerations don’t resolve the matter, philosophically, I would be inclined to exercise restraint and not insert myself or a panel of the 3rd Circuit, if I was confirmed, into a position of declaring what the meaning of the ambiguity is as opposed to deferring back to the legislature on that topic.”
CNN’s Devan Cole contributed to this report.
This story has been updated with additional developments.