Congress
The Trump judge wars are back
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.
Blue Light News 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 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.
Trouble for Hakeem Jeffries is brewing close to home.
New Yorkers will decide Tuesday whether to support a slate of insurgent progressive candidates who are bullish about bucking the party establishment: Brad Lander, Darializa Avila Chevalier and Claire Valdez.
The Zohran Mamdani-backed trio are taking on incumbent, leadership allies: Reps. Dan Goldman, Congressional Hispanic Caucus Chair Adriano Espaillat as well as outgoing Rep. Nydia Velázquez, who endorsed a different successor.
The progressive challengers are positioning themselves as firebrands willing to play hardball to force the Democratic Caucus leftward. Take Chevalier, a Democratic Socialists of America member who told Vox last week that “all deportations are wrong” including for people who have been convicted of breaking U.S. law. Neither she nor Valdez have said if they would back Jeffries as speaker should Democrats take the majority.
In addition to presenting a long-term headache for a potential Jeffries speakership, progressive challenger wins would deliver an immediate blow to Jeffries’ credibility as a power broker in his own backyard. He endorsed Goldman and Espaillat.
As Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer weighs a 2028 reelection bid, he too will be paying close attention to the depth of lefty, anti-incumbent fervor among voters in his state.
Democratic leadership’s old guard will also be on watch Tuesday evening as Maryland decides who will replace former Majority Leader Steny Hoyer: his preferred successor Adrian Boafo or his old frenemy Nancy Pelosi’s pick of former Capitol Police officer Harry Dunn.
Democrats have been divided on the race from the jump, with Gov. Wes Moore and Sen. Angela Alsobrooks also backing Boafo. Fellow Marylander — and maybe 2028 presidential candidate — Sen. Chris Van Hollen got in on the action last month by knocking Boafo for taking AIPAC and crypto money.
And a PSA: The many, many self-funded campaign ads from warring Democratic millionaires Rep. April McClain Delaney and her predecessor David Trone – who is trying to win his seat back after losing a Senate bid in 2024 – will come to an end Tuesday night.
Republicans won’t escape the messy primary day.
In Utah, House GOP leadership member Rep. Blake Moore will attempt to beat challenger Karianne Lisonbee who is taking him to task for once opposing partisan gerrymandering. An AI proxy war is also playing out in Rep. Celeste Maloy’s district where former state Rep. Phil Lyman is attacking the congresswoman — who has received nearly $1 million from an Anthropic-funded super PAC — over data center construction.
Yet, at least one House Republican is pulling for a Democrat Tuesday evening.
Vulnerable GOP Rep. Mike Lawler has meddled in the Democratic primary to run against him. Jason Beeferman reports that Lawler has tried to tear down Army vet Cait Conley via a covert text blast, among other tactics, seeming to prefer that he get to run against her opponent Beth Davidson.
What else we’re watching:
— TRUMP TO GET SAVE AMERICA ACT REALITY CHECK IN SENATE: President Donald Trump was invited to Republican senators’ lunch Wednesday to push for his No. 1 priority, the GOP election bill known as the SAVE America Act. But several outgoing Republicans who have clashed with Trump said Monday they will be there to deliver a reality check: The bill isn’t passing, and it’s time to move on.
— SCHUMER FORCES IRAN WAR POWERS VOTE ON WARY GOP: Schumer Tuesday plans to force the Senate to vote on a House-passed Iran war powers resolution – putting on record Republicans who are publicly skeptical of Trump’s agreement last week to end the conflict. The measure won House approval earlier this month after four House Republicans joined Democrats to effectively halt military operations unless Congress authorizes it.
Jordain Carney contributed to this report.
Senate Republicans’ farm bill proposal rejects Democrats’ demands to delay a planned shift of some food aid costs to states, according to three people familiar with the plans — jeopardizing hopes of winning bipartisan support for the package.
Democrats say they will oppose a farm bill that doesn’t push back a requirement that will soon force some states to pay for some Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits, a provision included in the domestic policy megalaw Republicans passed last year.
Senate Agriculture Chair John Boozman (R-Ark.) gave Senate staff and industry representatives a private preview of his farm bill text Monday afternoon ahead of a planned public release of the discussion draft at 2 p.m. Tuesday, according to the people, all of whom were granted anonymity to discuss the not-yet-public plans.
Boozman will need some Democratic support to guarantee the bill can clear the 60-vote threshold on the Senate floor.
A GOP spokesperson for the Agriculture Committee said Boozman had “developed a discussion draft that can earn the bipartisan support needed for Senate passage.” The spokesperson added that Boozman will continue talks with senators and industry representatives while “finalizing text and moving toward a markup.”
The draft legislation also excludes some Republican and agriculture industry priorities, such as provisions that would allow year-round sales of E15 fuel and block states from creating certain animal welfare and pesticide labeling laws, according to the three people.
Senators from both parties are already eyeing how they might amend the bill to include their priorities. That could muddy the legislation’s path forward by generating a number of conflicts during the committee’s markup ahead of a potential floor vote on the package.
Some GOP senators whose state budgets would be hard hit by the change have privately indicated that they would support delaying the provision, which is set to begin October 2027.
Those senators and anti-hunger advocates argue the SNAP cost-share plan will kick people off the program and lead to benefit cuts. Democrats also note that many states will already receive delays or exemptions to the cost-share requirement due to high or low payment error rates.
Boozman said in an interview last month that he was “open to listening” to Democrats’ argument, but contended it could complicate his efforts to craft a budget-neutral bill.
The Senate’s version largely mirrors the House’s, which passed with 12 Democratic votes in April. Boozman is aiming to mark up his bill between the chamber’s Fourth of July and August recesses.
Donald Trump is about to come face to face with one of his frequent punching bags: Senate Republicans.
They might just be in a mood to punch back.
The president was invited to GOP senators’ Wednesday lunch to push for his No. 1 priority, the GOP election bill known as the SAVE America Act. But several outgoing Republicans who have clashed with Trump said Monday they will be there to deliver a reality check: The bill isn’t passing, and it’s time to move on.
“I’m going to be there front and center,” Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) told reporters. “It will be important if it actually is a constructive exchange of different opinions, and hopefully we can all get on the same page. Right now, we’re not in a great place.”
Cornyn, who recently lost his bid for a fifth term to a Trump-endorsed challenger, reiterated the votes just aren’t there to pass the elections bill: “I’ve been around here long enough and been through enough battles and counted enough votes to know that it doesn’t just magically occur, no matter how much you wish it would happen.”
Sens. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) and Bill Cassidy (R-La.) — who are also departing the Senate in part due to Trump — said Monday they, too, will be at the closed-door lunch and urged Trump to turn the page on the SAVE America Act.
“I’m a co-sponsor, but it doesn’t have the votes, and so it’s time to talk about something else,” said Cassidy, who also lost to a Trump-backed primary opponent.
Trump was invited to the Wednesday lunch by Sen. Rick Scott (R-Fla.), who oversees the weekly gathering as GOP steering committee chair, at a tenuous moment. Senate Republicans have grown frustrated with Trump’s fixation on the elections bill, are openly questioning parts of his Iran deal and worry that his habit of blindsiding them with sudden policy U-turns is making it harder to preserve their majority in November.
Scott’s invitation comes as the elections bill has emerged as a perennial headache for Senate Majority Leader John Thune, whom Scott informed of the invite after it was extended. Thune and other members of the GOP conference insist it doesn’t have the votes to pass and have begged Trump to focus on more attainable priorities.
Same goes, they say, for other Trump demands — killing the 60-vote filibuster threshold for legislation, for instance, and ending the “blue slip” practice of giving home-state senators a say on some presidential nominees.
“None of those are going to happen here, and we need to be honest with the president,” Tillis said. “So why don’t we spend more time being productive about how we communicate, when we communicate, and get some of these very pressing issues done?”
But Trump has shown he will not relent, especially on the SAVE America Act — a bill that would impose new proof-of-citizenship and identification requirements for U.S. voters in its base form, with the president demanding still other controversial provisions added on top of that.
In a Truth Social post late last week, Trump name-checked Thune and urged the Senate to nix the filibuster and approve the bill: “Anybody who doesn’t want to Terminate the Filibuster is a FOOL, a very stupid one, at that!”
Several GOP senators, including Mitch McConnell of Kentucky and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska, have objected to the precedent the bill would set by nationalizing election procedures. Test votes on the bill have not garnered more than 48 supporters, though a narrower bill focused on voter ID won 50 votes. That’s still far short of the 60 votes needed to defeat a certain Democratic filibuster.
Asked late last week about Trump’s comments, Thune said a majority of Senate Republicans have long-held views against nixing the filibuster.
“It’s not a question of what I want to do or don’t want to do,” he said. “It does always come back to the math. And … there just aren’t the votes to do it.”
Thune said Monday that he “wouldn’t be surprised” if the election bill comes up but predicted it would be a “back and forth” between Trump and GOP senators over multiple subjects, including the brewing Iran deal and the stalemate over a key surveillance law and future of the director of national intelligence post.
He added that “hopefully” the discussion would include “celebrating some of our successes, talking about the path forward.”
The GOP election bill has become a consistent friction point within the party and within the Senate GOP conference. Senate Republicans largely support the bill but believe the party needs to turn its focus to Democrats, rather than fighting each other, with just months to go until the midterms.
Republican senators have kvetched for months about how they believe Sen. Mike Lee (R-Utah) is setting unrealistic expectations for the bill’s passage. Lee posted on X over the weekend that he spoke with Trump and “he’s as convinced as I am that we can get this done if the Senate’s willing to do the hard work.”
Cornyn called out Lee Monday, saying that he “is contributing to this fantasy that somehow it’s going to happen.”
Lee responded that the election bill isn’t a fantasy but “a plan to avoid a nightmare — one that’s coming soon unless we act.”
Senate Republicans agreed to take up the voting bill earlier this year, in part after leaders privately reassured wary GOP senators that the debate wouldn’t result in an attempt to skirt the 60-vote filibuster. But the weekslong debate failed to break the stalemate on the bill, and Senate Republicans ultimately placed it on the back burner as other legislative deadlines piled up.
Conservatives, however, hadn’t forgotten about the bill, and now they want the Senate to continue to vote on it.
Scott — who came in third in the leadership contest Thune won after the 2024 election— sent a letter to his fellow Senate Republicans Monday, a copy of which was obtained by Blue Light News, saying that he wanted to have “robust conversations” this week about what the party should be focused on before the midterms. That, he said, should include voting on the SAVE America Act or narrower voter ID legislation.
“We need to make a clear distinction as to who the good guys are and who the bad guys are,” Scott wrote in the letter. “We need to show voters that we are listening to them and will fight for their priorities whether any Democrats vote with us or not.”
- Capitol agenda: Jeffries gets preview of his future headaches
- OMB nominee ‘can’t commit’ to forgoing ‘pocket rescissions’ funding gambit this year
- Turek leads Hinson in Iowa Senate poll of likely general election voters
- Capitol agenda: House GOP races to make Recon 3.0 real
- A rising populist tide is threatening New York’s powerful incumbents
- Senate Judiciary schedules confirmation hearing for Todd Blanche
- OMB nominee ‘can’t commit’ to forgoing ‘pocket rescissions’ funding gambit this year
- Senate Republicans say it’s time to give Trump a reality check
- Senate Republicans exclude Democrats’ food aid demand from farm bill
- Turek leads Hinson in Iowa Senate poll of likely general election voters
-
Politics1 year agoFormer ‘Squad’ members launching ‘Bowman and Bush’ YouTube show
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoLuigi Mangione acknowledges public support in first official statement since arrest
-
Politics1 year agoFormer Kentucky AG Daniel Cameron launches Senate bid
-
Uncategorized2 years ago
Bob Good to step down as Freedom Caucus chair this week
-
The Dictatorship1 year agoPete Hegseth’s tenure at the Pentagon goes from bad to worse
-
The Josh Fourrier Show2 years agoDOOMSDAY: Trump won, now what?
-
Politics1 year agoBlue Light News’s Editorial Director Ryan Hutchins speaks at Blue Light News’s 2025 Governors Summit
-
The Dictatorship10 months agoMike Johnson sums up the GOP’s arrogant position on military occupation with two words