Emil Bove Continues Department of Justice Engagement After Judicial Confirmation

WASHINGTON - Emil Bove, recently confirmed by a narrow Senate margin to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, remained active at the Department of Justice this week, raising fresh questions about ethical boundaries for incoming federal judges.

According to a report from Raw Story, Bove attended a Justice Department event celebrating what officials touted as the successful “crime-fighting takeover” of the Washington, D.C., police force just days after receiving his judicial commission on August 20, 2025. Video of the gathering shows Bove standing alongside top DOJ leadership as President Donald Trump and Attorney General Pam Bondi addressed attendees.

Legal observers warn that such continued engagement with executive-branch activities may undermine public confidence in judicial impartiality. Stephen Gillers, a legal ethics expert at New York University, noted that, while social interactions with former colleagues are permissible, advising or otherwise appearing aligned with the administration’s political agenda can erode trust in the judiciary’s independence.

Bove’s decision to remain at DOJ events follows whistleblower allegations that, during his tenure as Associate Deputy Attorney General, he encouraged subordinate attorneys to defy court orders with profane language-claims he has denied recalling. Critics argue that lingering at the Department beyond confirmation could create conflicts of interest when cases involving Trump administration policies come before Bove’s court.

A Justice Department spokesperson defended Bove’s actions as fully compliant with existing rules and ethics requirements, emphasizing that the federal judicial code of conduct only takes effect once a judge is sworn in. Bove has not yet completed his judicial oath, and the department maintains that no regulations were violated.

This episode echoes concerns raised in 1991, when future Judge J. Michael Luttig, confirmed to the bench, continued assisting in Supreme Court confirmation efforts-a practice that prompted ethics debates at the time. Luttig himself has remarked that while occasional attendance at departmental functions might be innocuous, remaining active for an extended period “raises questions about what Bove might have worked on in that period that he could review as a judge”.

As Bove prepares to take his seat on the Third Circuit, scrutiny of his post-confirmation activities shows no sign of abating, with legal analysts watching closely for any further entanglements that could test the limits of judicial ethics and impartiality.