The Most Unqualified Nominee in a Generation
Harry Litman
We’ve seen some eyebrow-raising judicial nominations over the last decade—figures whose résumés were thin, whose views were extreme, whose temperaments seemed misaligned with lifetime judicial service. But Emil Bove, whose nomination the Senate Judiciary Committee takes up Thursday, isn’t just another unfit nominee. Bove is not merely a bad choice for the federal appellate bench. He is probably the most unqualified nominee in a generation, and certainly the most brazenly political.
That may sound hyperbolic—until you review the record. Even before last week’s bombshell developments, the case against Bove’s nomination to the Third Circuit was strong. And now, with the release of a whistleblower report that includes damning new details—and, crucially, corroborating documentation—the situation has moved from troubling to disqualifying.
Let’s start with what we already knew. Bove, who serves as Principal Associate Deputy Attorney General in the Department of Justice, assembled a checkered record in his time as a prosecutor, with stark warning signs of poor temperament and intemperate use of prosecutorial power.
In 2018, a group of prominent defense attorneys took the highly unusual step of sending a formal letter to the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the Southern District of New York, lodging complaints about Bove’s conduct during a federal trial. They described him as an overbearing and bullying presence in the courtroom—someone who steamrolled witnesses, antagonized defense counsel, and disregarded professional norms. The letter argued that Bove’s behavior went beyond zealous advocacy and crossed into personal intimidation, undermining the fairness of the proceedings. Defense attorneys described him as “a prosecutor version of a drunken driver” and “totally hung up on a power trip.”
https://harrylitman.substack.com/p/the-most-unqualified-nominee-in-a
= new reply since forum marked as read
