A former Justice Department official and outspoken critic of Trump judicial nominee Emil Bove advised his colleagues on how to “sway” the Trump administration’s litigation strategy in a case involving the deportation of Venezuelan gang members in a way he found to be personally favorable, The Federalist has learned.
The revelation came to fruition in new documents obtained by The Federalist that shine a light on Erez Reuveni’s conduct in a case (J.G.G. v. Trump) over President Trump’s use of the Alien Enemies Act to deport Tren de Aragua gang members. Reuveni served as acting deputy director for the Office of Immigration Litigation until early April, when he was suspended and subsequently fired for failing to “zealously advocate on behalf of the United States,” according to Attorney General Pam Bondi.
While Reuveni’s dismissal came after his reportedly improper handling of the DOJ’s deportation of Salvadoran national Kilmar Abrego Garcia, the new records acquired by The Federalist document his willingness to advance his own preferred litigation strategy over that of DOJ leadership.
The matter in question first kicked up on March 15, when Obama-appointed District Judge James Boasberg issued a temporary restraining order attempting to bar the Trump administration from deporting the group of illegal aliens under the AEA. As The Federalist’s Margot Cleveland reported, by the time Boasberg issued a written order that day enjoining the administration from deporting the group of Venezuelans covered under the president’s directive, “the Trump Administration had already removed two planes filled with illegal aliens from the United States.”
White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt later argued the foreign gang members “had already been removed from U.S. territory” by the time of Boasberg’s edict, and that “the written order and the administration’s actions do not conflict.”
After requesting a series of explanations from the administration in a March 17 order, Boasberg issued another directive on March 18. He demanded the government “file ex parte and under seal (or submit to the Court) a declaration” including specific details about “the two flights leaving U.S. airspace before 7:25 p.m. on March 15, 2025.” Boasberg required the administration to file a response by noon the following day.
This prompted the DOJ to file an emergency motion to stay the March 18 order on March 19. The motion asked, in part, that the Obama judge grant the administration more time to “evaluat[e] whether to invoke the state secrets privilege as to portions of the information sought by this Court’s order” that may pertain to sensitive national security matters — a prospective issue Boasberg referenced during the case’s March 17 hearing.
Boasberg granted in part and denied in part the motion that day, giving defendants until noon on March 20 to “provide the information discussed in the Minute Order of March 18, 2025, or to invoke the state-secrets doctrine and explain the basis for such invocation.”
[EXCLUSIVE: Memo Reveals D.C. Judges Are Predisposed Against Trump Administration]
The prospect of invoking state secrets privilege in the case did not appear to sit well with Reuveni. The then-DOJ official sent an email to several colleagues on March 19, in which he took it upon himself to opine that such privilege “has no application here.”
“Hopefully this doesn’t ripen into an issue, and we comply with this order and submit the declaration as required by 12 noon (absent a stay of that order from a higher court and that is the only offramp I see as viable), and without invoking a privilege that has no application here,” Reuveni wrote.
Reuveni went on to declare that he would “withdraw from the case” if DOJ leadership did not follow his preferred approach to the case. The more notable part of the email, however, came in the following sentences, in which Reuveni seemingly encouraged his colleagues to do the same as a way of potentially altering the agency’s ultimate handling of the matter.
“If, however, folks upstairs decide to do something other than that, I will withdraw from this case and will decline to appear on any further briefings, whatever the consequences may be,” Reuveni wrote. “You all have to make your own decisions, but that is what I would advise. And if it comes to it, our collective civil/career group taking that position might help sway the outcome.”
“Hope it doesn’t come to this, I expect most likely it won’t, but getting this down in writing now before things get crazy again,” he added.
Reuveni is not known for having detailed experience with the subject of state secrets privilege, and it’s unclear why he felt confident in attempting to override the Trump administration’s legal strategy on that matter given his lack of experience.
The DOJ ultimately invoked state secrets privilege in the case on March 24.
In recent months, Reuveni has become a favorite among Democrats and their media allies. Both parties have attempted to use Reuveni’s allegations to try and sink Trump judicial nominee Emil Bove’s nomination to the 3rd Circuit Court of Appeals.
As part of his allegations, Reuveni has claimed that Bove — previously his superior at the agency — instructed DOJ officials to defy court orders. Documents previously reported by The Federalist undermine such claims, however.
The U.S. Senate invoked cloture (50-48) on Bove’s nomination Thursday afternoon. Sens. Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, voted in opposition, while Sens. Katie Britt, R-Ala., and Ruben Gallego, D-Ariz., did not vote.