Bulwark Takes: Bombshell – Whistleblower Says Trump Nominee Defied Court Order
Released: July 10, 2025
Hosts: Sam Stein & Kyle Cheney

Introduction

In this pivotal episode of Bulwark Takes, Sam Stein, Managing Editor at The Bulwark, engages in a critical discussion with Kyle Cheney of Politico. The conversation centers around a groundbreaking whistleblower report implicating Emil Bovey, a top official in the Department of Justice (DOJ) and a Trump-appointed nominee for a federal judgeship. This episode delves deep into the multifaceted controversies surrounding Bovey, shedding light on his role within the DOJ, the implications of the whistleblower's revelations, and the broader impact on the judicial nomination process.

Background on Emil Bovey

Emil Bovey emerges as a contentious figure within the DOJ landscape. Prior to the whistleblower disclosures, Bovey had already established a controversial reputation:

• Representation of Trump: Bovey represented former President Donald Trump in his criminal trial and managed several of Trump's other criminal cases.

• Reputation at SDNY: Known as a "hard-charging" and "abrasive" official, Bovey was infamous for his aggressive tactics at the Southern District of New York (SDNY) during his first tenure, where he was perceived to "steamroll" colleagues and adversaries alike.

• Involvement in High-Profile Cases: Bovey played a significant role in dismantling the prosecution of Eric Adams in New York, a move that ignited controversy and led to multiple resignations within the department.

• January 6th Prosecutions: He was instrumental in the effort to fire prosecutors involved in the January 6th Capitol riot cases, fostering an environment of fear that suggested potential targeting of FBI officials involved in those prosecutions.

Notable Quote:
“Emil Bovey is a controversial figure. Even prior to this whistleblower disclosure, he represented Trump in his criminal trial and actually all of his criminal cases pretty much.”
— Kyle Cheney [01:07]

Controversial Cases Involving Bovey

The episode highlights Bovey’s involvement in several high-stakes and contentious cases, emphasizing his influential role within the DOJ:

1. Alien Enemies Act Case:

   • Deportations to El Salvador: Under the Alien Enemies Act, the DOJ expedited the deportation of individuals to El Salvador, labeling them as gang members.
   • Judicial Intervention: A judge intervened, ordering the halt of these deportations. However, Bovey and his team proceeded with the deportations, leading to the deplaning of approximately 130 individuals despite the court's directive.

2. Kilmara Brago Garcia Deportation:

   • Erroneous Deportation: Garcia was deported based on flawed and illegal grounds. A subsequent judicial order mandated his return.

In both instances, Bovey's actions demonstrated a pattern of defying judicial orders, raising significant legal and ethical questions about the DOJ's adherence to the rule of law.

Notable Quote:
“Even though a judge sort of ordered that operation halted, they still ended up sending about 130 people there and deplaning them in El Salvador.”
— Kyle Cheney [02:04]

Whistleblower Allegations

The crux of the episode revolves around the whistleblower, Rouvainy, a seasoned attorney at the Office of Immigration Litigation. His disclosures present alarming allegations against Bovey:

• Defiance of Court Orders: Rouvainy claims that Bovey explicitly instructed DOJ officials to defy a court order regarding the aforementioned deportations. This alleged instruction included crude language, amplifying the severity of the misconduct.

• Timing of Allegations: The whistleblower's allegations stem from conversations that occurred before the judge's written order was issued, suggesting a premeditated intent to bypass judicial directives.

• Evidence from Communications: Recent disclosures include real-time text messages and emails that document the DOJ's internal communications during the incident. Notably, Rouvainy sent multiple emails stating, “the judge just said this. We can't do this,” indicating his attempts to halt the deportations following the oral order.

Notable Quotes:

• “The whole point is to bolster his credibility, because I think after the initial round and Bobby's response and the Justice Department leader's response, there was some question about, well, this is a political hit job, is it?”
  — Kyle Cheney [07:27]

• “Guess we're going to say you to the court Super." [Referring to Bovey's alleged statement]
  — Rouvainy [06:09]

Legal and Procedural Implications

The whistleblower's report raises profound questions about the DOJ's respect for judicial authority and the legal boundaries governing administrative actions:

• Oral vs. Written Orders: A significant point of contention is the binding nature of oral orders. Rouvainy contends that the oral order issued by the judge does not hold legal weight, a claim that is legally questionable and undermines the judicial system's authority.

• Jurisdictional Limits: Bovey's justification centered on the argument that once the planes departed U.S. airspace, Judge Boasberg's jurisdiction no longer applied. This interpretation is highly disputed, as jurisdiction does not simply lapse with the physical location of an operation.

• Integrity of the DOJ: These actions, if proven true, suggest a troubling disregard for lawful procedures and an attempt to override judicial oversight, potentially eroding public trust in the DOJ.

Notable Quote:
“Both of those things are highly questionable. Whether his jurisdiction ends over US Government officials just because they've left the US Airspace, and then that the oral order somehow wasn't binding.”
— Kyle Cheney [05:53]

Senate Judiciary Committee and Nomination Process

The episode also delves into the political ramifications of Bovey's nomination:

• Senator Thom Tillis' Role: Sitting on the Senate Judiciary Committee, Senator Tillis is a key player in the nomination process. Despite pressure from Trump and his involvement in contentious domestic legislation, Tillis has signaled support for Bovey's nomination.

• Political Calculus: Kyle Cheney describes Tillis as a "lame duck" senator, no longer seeking reelection and thus less beholden to political pressures. This status may influence his decision to support Bovey, irrespective of the controversies surrounding him.

• Implications for the Judiciary: The support from a significant senator, even amidst serious allegations, underscores the complexities and potential biases within the judicial appointment process.

Notable Quote:
“...Tillis is a lame duck now. He's not running for reelection. He helped tank the nomination of Ed Martin to be U.S. attorney in D.C. and so it's kind of a, you know, figuring out. His calculus is not clear.”
— Kyle Cheney [08:32]

Conclusion and Future Developments

As the episode draws to a close, Sam Stein raises the issue of the recent birthright citizenship ruling, hinting at its potential implications. However, the primary focus remains on the Emil Bovey controversy and its ramifications for the DOJ and the federal judiciary. The disclosures and ensuing political maneuvers suggest a tumultuous road ahead for Bovey's nomination, with significant scrutiny likely from both legal experts and political figures.

Notable Quote:
“Once the whistleblower report was made, and that didn't bother him, I don't know if these disclosures will.”
— Sam Stein [09:12]

Key Takeaways

• Emil Bovey's Controversial Tenure: His aggressive and sometimes questionable actions within the DOJ have raised alarms about the integrity of his candidacy for a federal judgeship.

• Whistleblower's Impact: The revelations by Rouvainy provide crucial evidence suggesting potential misconduct and disregard for judicial orders within the DOJ.

• Political Dynamics: Senator Thom Tillis' support for Bovey, despite substantial controversies, highlights the intricate and often opaque nature of judicial nominations.

• Future Implications: The DOJ's internal dynamics and the Senate Judiciary Committee's decisions will significantly influence the trajectory of this nomination and the broader perception of the DOJ's adherence to legal norms.

This episode of Bulwark Takes offers a comprehensive examination of a high-stakes political and legal saga, providing listeners with in-depth insights into the complexities of judicial nominations, the importance of whistleblower protections, and the ongoing tussle between different branches of government.