Latest news with #Senate-confirmed
USA Today
9 hours ago
- Politics
- USA Today
What whistleblowers said about just-confirmed Trump appeals court judge Emil Bove
Emil Bove, President Donald Trump's Senate-confirmed pick to a prestigious judicial role, overcame accusations of misconduct at the Justice Department. Here's what whistleblowers and Bove said. The U.S. Senate narrowly confirmed Emil Bove, President Donald Trump's controversial pick for a prestigious judicial role, in a 50-49 vote late July 29, dismissing multiple whistleblower complaints about Bove's conduct as a top Justice Department official. The vote unfolded almost entirely along party lines. Two Republicans, Sens. Lisa Murkowski of Alaska and Susan Collins of Maine, joined all of the Senate's Democrats in opposition. Bove is now set to be sworn in to his new role on the Philadelphia-based U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, which handles federal appeals for Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware. Bove, a former personal criminal defense lawyer for Trump, overcame multiple accusations from whistleblowers that he had suggested the Trump administration defy court orders if necessary and misled Congress while serving as a top official within Trump's Justice Department. Bove will now shift from that prosecutorial role to the appeals court. Bove defended his integrity at his Senate confirmation hearing, saying he has honored his oath to uphold the U.S. Constitution and has a "deep respect for the rule of law." Here's what whistleblowers said ahead of Bove's confirmation: Whistleblower accusation #1: Ignoring court orders? Shortly before the Senate Judiciary Committee considered Bove's nomination June 25, a whistleblower – former Justice Department prosecutor Erez Reuveni – alleged that Bove advocated at a March 14 meeting for the department to ignore court orders if necessary to make sure deportation flights took off. "Bove stated that DOJ would need to consider telling the courts 'f--- you' and ignore any such court order," according to Reuveni's June 24 whistleblower disclosure. At his confirmation hearing, Bove said he "did not suggest that there would be any need to consider ignoring court orders," adding that there were no court orders in place at the time of the meeting. Bove said he couldn't remember if he instructed his subordinates to say "f--- you" to courts in some manner, but that he has "certainly said things encouraging litigators at the department to fight hard for valid positions." Reuveni was fired in April, after he raised concerns to his chain of command "for nearly three weeks regarding the government's compliance with court orders and candor to the courts," according to the disclosure. While Democrats sounded the alarm, Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, said June 25 that Reuveni's allegations weren't a cause for concern. "Even if we accept most of the claims as true, there's no scandal here," Grassley said. "Government lawyers aggressively litigating and interpreting court orders isn't misconduct. It's what lawyers do all the time." Another whistleblower later came forward to corroborate claims from Reuveni. The person, whose identity has remained shielded, provided internal Justice Department documents supporting Reuveni's allegations, according to Whistleblower Aid, a nonprofit that represents the whistleblower. Whistleblower accusation #2: Misleading Congress on Eric Adams case? Another whistleblower, whose identity hasn't been publicly disclosed, came forward to allege Bove misled Congress during his Senate confirmation, according to reports from the Washington Post and CNN. The testimony concerned the circumstances behind the Justice Department dropping its criminal bribery case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams. Bove directed prosecutors to drop the case after Trump took office, saying the prosecution was restricting Adams' ability to focus on illegal immigration and violent crime. At his confirmation hearing, Bove denied allegations that he negotiated a "quid pro quo" – meaning an exchange of favors – with Adams' lawyers, under which the Justice Department would drop the charges. Bove also denied instructing a lawyer to stop taking notes when Adams' lawyers allegedly urged a quid-pro-quo deal, although Bove said at some point he did remark on a lawyer taking extensive notes. Several Justice Department prosecutors resigned rather than follow Bove's orders to drop the Adams case, which has nonetheless been dismissed. The Justice Department didn't immediately respond to USA TODAY's request for comment about whether Bove misled Congress. Gates McGavick, a department spokesperson, responded in the Washington Post's July 28 story that Bove has done "incredible work at the Department of Justice" and was going to be "an excellent judge." Justice Connection, an organization composed of Justice Department alumni concerned that their former colleagues are under attack in the Trump administration, put out a statement that was short on specifics, but said the whistleblower "has strong evidence that Emil Bove was not truthful" during his confirmation hearing. The whistleblower tried to share the information with Republican senators for weeks, according to the statement. Contributing: Erin Mansfield and Bart Jansen – USA TODAY; Reuters
Washington Post
a day ago
- Politics
- Washington Post
Alina Habba's future as New Jersey's top federal prosecutor faces legal test
President Donald Trump's effort to keep Alina Habba in charge of the U.S. attorney's office in New Jersey is facing a legal challenge that could influence his ability to extend terms for some of his other controversial picks to lead prosecutor's offices across the country. Defendants in a drug and gun case set to go to trial in New Jersey this week are urging a federal court to toss the charges, arguing that Habba, a former Trump defense lawyer, has no legal standing to exercise prosecutorial powers. 'The executive branch has exceeded its lawful authority,' defense lawyer Thomas Mirigliano wrote in a court filing. 'Thus, all subsequent prosecutorial actions taken by Ms. Habba or any assistant U.S. attorneys relying on her purported authority lack constitutional legitimacy.' A judge who briefly considered the matter Monday called that argument 'nonfrivolous' before the issue was transferred to a judge in Pennsylvania who will now rule on the merits of Mirigliano's filing. Trump appointed Habba, whom the state's Democratic senators have panned as a 'partisan warrior,' to a 120-day term as New Jersey's interim U.S. attorney this year. With that tenure having expired last week, the state's federal judges voted not to renew her appointment and chose Desiree Leigh Grace, a veteran prosecutor from the office, to replace her. The Justice Department quickly fired Grace, and Trump administration officials deployed a complex series of procedural moves that it maintains will allow Habba to remain on the job indefinitely. Those steps included Habba resigning as interim U.S. attorney before the official expiration of her term on Saturday, and the president withdrawing her pending nomination for a full four years as the Senate-confirmed U.S. attorney. Attorney General Pam Bondi then appointed Habba to the No. 2 job in the New Jersey office — a role the Justice Department maintains will allow Habba to continue serving as its de facto leader since no one is currently appointed to fill the office's top position. Experts have questioned the legality of those unconventional maneuvers and whether Habba still holds the authority to act as the Garden State's top prosecutor. But Bondi and others have accused New Jersey's federal judges, many of whom were appointed by Presidents Barack Obama and Joe Biden, of working to frustrate Trump's agenda. Mirigliano — a lawyer for Julien Giraud Jr., one of the defendants contesting the charges on grounds that Habba 'holds office unlawfully' — argued that 'the illegitimacy of Habba's appointment' undermines his client's due process rights. U.S. District Judge Edward S. Kiel described Mirigliano's gambit as a 'nonfrivolous argument' and suggested during a brief court hearing Monday that other federal judges in New Jersey might be preparing to pause proceedings in other criminal cases as they wait for questions over Habba's legal authority to be settled. Until then, the issue threatens to cast much of the work of that U.S. attorney's office into doubt. Hours after Mirigliano's motion, Michael A. Chagares, the chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, transferred the matter to a federal judge in Pennsylvania to sort out, apparently because New Jersey's federal bench had already voted against extending Habba's term. That new judge, U.S. District Judge Matthew Brann, huddled with lawyers on both sides Tuesday to review how to handle the matter. Brann — a former Republican Party official, member of the conservative Federalist Society and an Obama appointee — gained notoriety in 2020 with a withering dismissal of Trump's efforts to overturn the results of the election in Pennsylvania that year. In court filings Tuesday, the Justice Department insisted on the legality of the president's effort to keep Habba on the job and said Trump intended to immediately fire Grace, the judge's pick, even if she'd assumed the role of U.S. attorney. 'Ultimately, the President has both constitutional and statutory authority to remove from office any U.S. attorney — whether appointed by the President, the Attorney General, or the courts --- and to replace that person … with someone he believes better suited to fulfill that role,' government lawyers wrote. They maintained that even if Brann disagrees, Giraud's case — and countless others pending in New Jersey — could still move forward because they were launched by Senate-confirmed U.S. attorneys in prior administrations. That still would not address the status of any charges Habba's office has brought since the legality of her position was called into doubt. A review of federal court dockets since Saturday, when Habba's interim term officially expired, showed prosecutors had filed cases against at least three new defendants on charges including bank fraud and fraudulent possession of a government ID. K. Anthony Thomas, the chief federal public defender in New Jersey, urged Brann in a separate filing Tuesday to consider what would become of those cases and others that Habba's office will continue to bring separately from the issue now being raised by Giraud. 'It is critical that the court decide these issues as they are presented by the facts of each case,' Thomas wrote, noting the 'complexity and importance of the legal issues involved.' Brann has sought further briefing on the matter and has not yet indicated whether he will hold a hearing before ruling on Giraud's motion to dismiss his case. The Justice Department has deployed maneuvers similar to those used to keep Habba on behalf of at least two of Trump's other controversial appointments as interim U.S. attorneys — John E. Sarcone III, in the Albany-based Northern District of New York, and Sigal Chattah, in the District of Nevada. Unlike Habba, neither of them had been nominated by Trump for a full, four-year term in their posts. That could be due in part to headwinds working against them in the Senate. Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa), chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee, has said he intends to continue to honor a custom, known as the 'blue slip,' that allows either of a state's two senators to block the president's nominees for judicial or U.S. attorney roles. New Jersey's senators — Cory Booker and Andy Kim, both Democrats — opposed Habba's nomination. And Sen. Catherine Cortez Masto (D-Nevada) has made clear she would oppose Chattah were she to be nominated. Trump urged Grassley to reconsider in a post to social media Tuesday evening, calling the blue slip tradition 'a hoax' that has stymied his ability to get his nominees confirmed. 'The only way to beat this Hoax,' he wrote, 'is to appoint a Democrat or, a weak and ineffective Republican. Therefore, I would never be able to appoint Great Judges or U.S. Attorneys in California, New York, New Jersey, Illinois, Virginia, and other places.'
Newsweek
22-07-2025
- Business
- Newsweek
Should Donald Trump Fire Jerome Powell? Wilbur Ross Weighs In
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Former Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross believes that President Donald Trump attempting to unseat Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell would result in a lengthy legal battle and few benefits for the president. In an interview with Newsweek last week, Ross said he does not think Trump intends to fire Powell. Asked whether Trump should, Ross responded: "I don't think it's a question of should." "Powell's term expires mid-year next year. So he's not going to be in for very long in any event," he said. "And if Trump went to fire him, no doubt it would end up in court, and to get a decision like that, which undoubtedly would end up in the Supreme Court, to try to bring that to a decision in less than a year is very unlikely." "So I'm not so sure that even if he wanted to do it. And even if he were able to ultimately convince the court that he has the power to do it, I'm not sure he'd save very much time." Why It Matters Talk of Powell's resignation, or the president firing him before his term ends in May 2026, stems from a dispute over the Federal Reserve's reluctance to cut interest rates from the current target range of 4.25–4.50 percent. Since the beginning of his second term, Trump and certain members of his cabinet have called for sizable rate cuts to stimulate economic growth and reduce the interest the United States pays on its debt. However, the central bank has repeatedly stated that it will remain in "wait-and-see" mode until there is greater clarity on the trajectory of inflation and until the full impact of Trump's tariffs on the U.S. economy is understood. Firing Powell from his Senate-confirmed post would mark a significant departure from the Fed's historically recognized independence, and it would likely raise questions about the stability of the U.S. economy. L: Former Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross speaks at the Concordia Annual Summit on September 23, 2024. R: Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell at a news conference in Washington, D.C., on May 7, 2025. L: Former Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross speaks at the Concordia Annual Summit on September 23, 2024. R: Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell at a news conference in Washington, D.C., on May 7, 2025. John Lamparski /for Concordia Summit / Getty Images What To Know Trump has taken to calling Powell, who chairs both the Fed's Board of Governors and its Open Market Committee, "too late Powell" over his decision to hold rates steady at successive monetary policy meetings, while also dubbing him a "stupid person" and "Trump Hater." However, the president's messaging on whether he intends to oust Powell has been mixed. Speaking to reporters in the Oval Office last week, Trump said that lowering interest rates by three percentage points would save the government $1 trillion in debt payments, and that he had spoken with Republican members of Congress about the possibility of firing the Fed chair. "Almost every one of them said I should, but I'm more conservative than they are," Trump said. "I don't rule out anything," he added, "but I think it's highly unlikely." According to Section 10 of the Federal Reserve Act, the president can remove any member of the Fed's Board of Governors "for cause," which is widely interpreted to mean serious misconduct or malfeasance in office. However, past Supreme Court cases have determined that this cannot be done for simple policy disagreements, i.e., over whether and when to adjust interest rates. Last week, Trump suggested that Powell could be forced to resign "for fraud," pointing to the recent $2.5 billion renovation of the Fed's Washington, D.C. headquarters. In a recent letter to Powell, Russ Vought, director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), called the renovations an "ostentatious overhaul," and said that statements made by Powell during his testimony before the Senate Banking Committee in June raised "serious questions" about the project's compliance with the federal guidelines. In his response, Powell said: "We have taken great care to ensure the project is carefully overseen since it was first approved by the Board in 2017." As well as the oversight it has already been subject to, Powell said he had asked the Federal Reserve's independent Inspector General "to conduct a fresh review of the project." Even if the allegations of fraud were substantiated and the Trump administration made formal attempts to remove him from his post, Powell would be able to contest this decision. As Ross told Newsweek, Powell's tenure could end before the case was fully resolved in the form of a Supreme Court ruling. However, in the case of a preliminary injunction, Vice Chair Philip Jefferson would assume Powell's duties during the dispute. During a press conference shortly following the presidential election, Powell said that it was "not permitted under law" for the president to demote or fire governors or those holding leadership positions within the Fed. When asked whether, if asked by Trump, he would resign from his post, Powell responded bluntly: "No." What People Are Saying President Donald Trump, speaking to reporters about Powell last week: "Fortunately, we get to make a change in the next, what, eight months or so, and we'll pick somebody that's good and we'll pick somebody. I just want a fair job. We want to see lower interest rates. Our country deserves it. We're making a lot of money. We're doing great as a country." Commerce Secretary Scott Bessent told Fox Business this week: "I know Chair Powell. There's nothing that tells me that he should step down right now. He's been a good public servant. His term ends in May. If he wants to see that through, I think he should. If he wants to leave early, I think he should." Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell, at a European Central Bank forum in Portugal on July: "I'm very focused on just doing my job. I mean, there are things that matter—using our tools to achieve the goals that Congress has given us: maximum employment, price stability, financial stability. And that's what we focus on 100 percent." What Happens Next In an interview with Bloomberg Television this week, Bessent said a "formal process" for identifying Powell's successor had begun. "It's President Trump's decision, and it will move at his speed," he added. Economists who previously spoke to Newsweek said they anticipate the Fed cutting rates by the end of the year at the latest. These cuts, they said, could range from one 25-basis-point cut to several of this size.
Mint
19-07-2025
- Business
- Mint
Trump is poised to grab control of the Fed next year
President Donald Trump wants the Federal Reserve to slash interest rates by three percentage points, a massive cut that could push borrowing costs back to pandemic lows. With two seats at the Fed likely opening up soon, he may finally get the chance to reshape the central bank and force the aggressive easing he is demanding. Governor Adriana Kugler's term expires in January 2026 and Jerome Powell's term as chair ends in May 2026. If Trump replaces both and Powell steps down from the board entirely (a typical move for departing chairs), the president will be responsible for appointing four of the seven governors. That is a working majority alongside a chair who may share his appetite for deep rate cuts. In theory, this could tilt the Federal Open Market Committee toward the kind of easing Trump wants. In practice, it isn't that simple. The Fed has held its benchmark rate steady at 4.25% to 4.50% despite cooling inflation and softening job growth. Powell says the committee needs more time to assess how tariffs and fiscal policy will ripple through the economy. He has made clear that July's inflation report–released after the Fed's next meeting–will be crucial. That makes a July cut unlikely. Some of Trump's Fed appointees are already laying the groundwork for easier policy. Governor Christopher Waller argues the labor market is weaker than headline numbers suggest and inflation risks are fading. He has hinted he may dissent at this month's meeting if the committee doesn't cut rates. Vice chair for supervision Michelle Bowman, also a Trump pick, has turned more dovish recently. The timing of these shifts matter, says Will Denyer at Gavekal Research. Waller has emerged as a front-runner to replace Powell next year. Unlike other potential nominees, he is already a sitting governor, Senate-confirmed and widely respected within the Fed system. But Trump's three-point cut isn't just unlikely, it's out of step with current economic conditions. The economy is still growing at a moderate pace, inflation remains above the Fed's 2% target and tariff uncertainty clouds the outlook. That hasn't stopped the president from pushing. He argues ultralow rates would slash the cost of servicing national debt, posting on social media: 'Very Low Inflation. One Trillion Dollars a year would be saved!!!" He's also continued ad hominem attacks on Powell. Market expectations are far more modest. Futures pricing suggests investors expect two quarter percentage point cuts by year-end, matching the Fed's own forecasts. Citi economists see a September move as increasingly likely, especially if job market data weakens further. But that is a long way from Trump's three-percentage-point target. Economists warn that such dramatic easing would require a seismic shift in expectations. Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman has compared Trump's approach to monetary policy to President Erdogan's in Turkey, where politically driven easing led to runaway inflation and emergency hikes. Whether Trump succeeds in reshaping the Fed depends on who he nominates and how far they're willing to go. The window is opening. But for now, Powell is still chair and the center of the committee still favors caution. That could change in 2026. Write to Nicole Goodkind at
Axios
16-07-2025
- Business
- Axios
Exclusive: Longtime critic Sen. Warren defends Fed in White House attacks
Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) will defend the Federal Reserve in a speech on Wednesday, an unlikely ally for the Fed as it faces unprecedented attacks from the Trump administration. Why it matters: Even one of Fed chair Jerome Powell's toughest, most consistent critics won't back the White House argument. The rare support from the influential lawmaker, who is the top Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee, shows how the party will hit back at White House pressure to oust Powell. What they're saying:"When [Trump's] initial attempts to bully Powell failed, Trump and Republicans in Congress suddenly decided to look into how much the Fed is spending on building renovations," Warren will tell a group of financial policymakers and economists at the Exchequer Club of Washington, D.C. In the remarks — first seen by Axios — Warren acknowledges the topsy-turvy world in which she defends the institution that she has slammed for years. "Independence does not mean impunity and I have long pushed for more transparency and accountability at the Fed. But give me a break," Warren will say in a speech that slams Trump economic policy. "[N]obody is fooled by this pretext to fire Chair Powell. And markets will tank if he does." The big picture: The new attack line among top Trump administration officials and some Republican lawmakers — renovations of the Fed's offices are too costly and over-the-top. President Trump on Tuesday said that the renovations issue could be grounds to fire Powell, a legally dubious move. Flashback: Just a few weeks ago, Warren co-sponsored legislation with Florida Republican Sen. Rick Scott that would force the Fed's watchdog to be Senate-confirmed — a move aimed at stepping up oversight of the central bank. Warren has called Powell a "dangerous man" in her criticism of the Fed's bank regulation policies. She is among the few lawmakers who voted against his confirmation in 2017; she did so again when former President Biden renominated Powell in 2021.
