President Donald Trump said Wednesday that Republicans fixated on Jeffrey Epstein are getting ‘duped’ by Democrats, further defending Attorney General Pam Bondi’s handling of the case. 

During an Oval Office meeting with the crown prince and prime minister of Bahrain, Trump said his predecessor, former President Joe Biden, reversed his first-term energy policies, leading to higher inflation. 

‘What Biden did is he ended our policies,’ Trump told reporters. ‘He doesn’t have a policy. Some lunatic around the desk had a policy. Whoever operated the autopen had a policy which is, by the way, I think the biggest scandals – that’s the scandal they should be talking about, not Jeffrey Epstein, the scandal you should be talking about is the autopen because I think it’s the biggest scandal, one of them, in American history.’ 

In early June, Trump directed Bondi and the White House counsel to investigate whether Biden’s aides used an autopen to sign official documents – such as pardons, executive orders, and judicial appointments – without his personal awareness. Biden has denied the claim. The House Oversight Committee is also investigating the conspiracy and has issued letters and subpoenas for testimony from several former White House aides, as well as Biden’s former White House physician, Dr. Kevin O’Connor. 

Trump said Wednesday that Bondi could release ‘whatever’s credible’ related to the Epstein case before addressing Republican infighting about what some categorize as an about-face on transparency by the administration. 

‘He’s dead. He’s gone,’ Trump said of Epstein. ‘And, all it is, is the Republicans, certain Republicans got duped by the Democrats, and they’re following a Democrat playbook and no different than Russia, Russia, Russia and all the other hoaxes.’

Trump said he couldn’t speak to FBI Director Kash Patel’s comments on the case but further defended Bondi.

‘I really think that she’s done very good. She says, ‘I gave you all the credible information,’ and if she finds any more credible information, she’ll give that too. What more can she do than that?’ Trump said. ‘I mean, honestly, what more can she do?’

His comments come after FBI deputy director Dan Bongino reportedly had a heated argument with Bondi over the Epstein case last week and took a day off from the job to cool down, sources previously told Fox News. 

A growing list of Republicans have demanded greater transparency from the Justice Department on the case. Trump earlier Wednesday said on social media that Democrats had come up with another ‘hoax,’ this time on Epstein, after previously being responsible for the widely discredited ‘Steele dossier’ during the Trump-Russia probe, as well as the cover-up of Hunter Biden’s laptop story ahead of the 2020 presidential election. 

‘Their new SCAM is what we will forever call the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax, and my PAST supporters have bought into this ‘bull—-’ hook, line, and sinker,’ Trump wrote on TRUTH Social. ‘They haven’t learned their lesson, and probably never will, even after being conned by the Lunatic Left for 8 long years.’ 

In the Oval Office, Trump said the Justice Department, and administration more broadly, are dealing with ‘bigger problems.’ 

‘We have problems with millions of illegal people that came in here, and they’re killers and murderers. We have 11,888 murderers that were allowed into our country by Biden. Sleepy Joe Biden, stupid Joe Biden, he allowed them into our country. And you know what we got to do something about? She’s got a lot of things she’s working on,’ Trump said. ‘It’s very sad that somebody can be waylaid, just get waylaid… I think she’s doing a great job.’ 

Trump said he has ‘lost faith’ in certain people in his own party regarding the Epstein case. 

‘I lost that because they got duped by the Democrats. The Democrats are good for nothing. They’ve done a terrible job. They almost destroyed our country,’ Trump said, championing how the passage of his ‘big, beautiful bill’ ensures ‘the biggest tax cut in history’ and the ‘biggest regulation cuts in history.’ 

‘These are the things that they should be talking about,’ Trump said. ‘The ‘big beautiful bill’ is one of the greatest pieces of legislation ever in this country, and the Democrats have nothing to combat it.’ 

Iran has until the end of August to agree to a nuclear deal with the United States and its allies, Fox News has learned. 

Secretary of State Marco Rubio and the foreign ministers of France, Germany and the United Kingdom set the de facto deadline, according to three sources with knowledge of a call Wednesday among the officials. 

If Tehran fails to agree to a deal, it would trigger the ‘snapback’ mechanism that automatically reimposes all sanctions previously imposed by the United Nations Security Council. 

The sanctions were lifted under the 2015 Iran deal. 

The Trump administration has tried pressuring Iran to accept a deal to walk back its nuclear program after U.S. and Israeli strikes targeting nuclear sites. 

United Against Nuclear Iran, a nonprofit that opposes Tehran’s effort to develop a nuclear weapon, applauded Wednesday’s news. 

‘Tehran has learned that, for the Trump administration, a deadline means a deadline,’ UANI Chairman and former Florida Gov. Jeb Bush and CEO Ambassador Mark D. Wallace said in a joint statement. 

‘After failing to agree to a deal within 60 days of diplomacy, the United States and Israel undertook targeted military action against the regime in June. Consequently, Tehran should take this new deadline seriously.’

On Monday, Iran warned it would retaliate if the U.N. Security Council imposes the snapback sanctions. 

‘The threat to use the snapback mechanism lacks legal and political basis and will be met with an appropriate and proportionate response from the Islamic Republic of Iran,’ Foreign Ministry spokesperson Esmaeil Baghaei claimed during a press conference, according to a Reuters report.

Baghaei didn’t specify how Tehran would retaliate. 

California Gov. Gavin Newsom, a Democrat, has made several comments in recent days pointing out President Donald Trump’s ties to deceased sex predator Jeffrey Epstein, as the president seeks to shut down questions about his administration’s refusal to release documents surrounding Epstein’s case and its claims that there is no ‘client list.’

Earlier this week, Newsom made an appearance on the Shawn Ryan Show, in which he was asked about Trump’s administration not releasing Epstein files after vowing during his campaign to release such documents.

‘The whole thing has, to me, always been a side show,’ Newsom said. ‘But I thought it got real interesting when Elon [Musk] put out that tweet and then all of a sudden a few weeks later, ‘what file?”

Newsom was referring to a since-deleted post on X in which Musk said last month that Trump ‘is in the Epstein files’ and that ‘is the real reason they have not been made public.’ Musk, a former close ally of Trump before their recent spat, has since made several more posts criticizing the administration for not releasing any Epstein ‘client list’ or making any arrests in connection to the Epstein case.

‘When Elon put that out, I thought it was a big tell,’ Newsom said.

The California governor added that Trump and Epstein knew each other, citing the images and videos of the two men together.

U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi said earlier this year that an Epstein ‘client list’ was on her desk before the Justice Department and FBI recently claimed that Epstein killed himself and that there is no evidence he kept such a list. Bondi also walked back her earlier comments, saying she was referring to the Epstein case file, not a ‘client list.’

Trump has sought to avoid the Epstein topic as of late, repeatedly arguing the issue does not matter anymore. He also said he no longer wants the support of ‘weaklings’ who continue to press the Epstein case.

‘Their new SCAM is what we will forever call the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax, and my PAST supporters have bought into this ‘bulls—,’ hook, line, and sinker,’ Trump wrote on Truth Social on Wednesday.

‘I have had more success in 6 months than perhaps any President in our Country’s history, and all these people want to talk about, with strong prodding by the Fake News and the success starved Dems, is the Jeffrey Epstein Hoax,’ he added. ‘Let these weaklings continue forward and do the Democrats work, don’t even think about talking of our incredible and unprecedented success, because I don’t want their support anymore!’

Trump said at the White House on Wednesday that Bondi could release ‘whatever’s credible’ related to the Epstein case as he defended her work on the matter and criticized Republicans who are still pushing for Epstein material to be released.

‘He’s dead. He’s gone,’ Trump said of Epstein. ‘And, all it is, is the Republicans, certain Republicans got duped by the Democrats, and they’re following a Democrat playbook and no different than Russia, Russia, Russia and all the other hoaxes.’

Newsom made a series of social media posts in recent days about Trump and Republicans declining to make information on the Epstein case public.

‘Why try so hard to block a list that ‘doesn’t exist’…?’ Newsom said on Tuesday, responding to news that House Republicans blocked an effort by Democrats to force the release of Epstein files.

The Golden State Democrat also wrote ‘Retweet’ in reply to a 2019 post from conservative commentator Charlie Kirk calling on Trump in his first term to order an investigation into Epstein for sex trafficking.

In another post, the governor wrote that Trump ‘calls his base ‘bad people” in response to a recent clip of the president saying he does not understand why the Epstein case would be of interest to anybody.

‘It’s pretty boring stuff,’ Trump told reporters in the clip. ‘I think only bad people want to keep something like that going.’

Newsom jokingly said he forgot about the Epstein files in response to a post Trump made announcing that Coca-Cola agreed to use real cane sugar.

‘Oh thank god! I’ve totally forgotten about the Epstein files now!’ Newsom said on Wednesday.

The governor posted a clip later on Wednesday with a picture of Trump and Epstein together, along with lyrics from the Nickelback song ‘Photograph’ that says ‘Look at this photograph.’

‘Nickelback said it best,’ Newsom wrote.

The global race to harness the power of artificial intelligence (AI) has begun. President Donald Trump got it right from the start when he issued an executive order in January to strengthen America’s AI – the next great technological forefront. 

From Day One as Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) administrator, it was clear that EPA would have a major hand in permitting reform to cut down barriers that have acted as a roadblock so we can bolster the growth of AI and make America the AI capital of the world. 

In fact, it’s an endeavor so important, it is a core pillar of my Powering the Great American Comeback initiative. 

Those looking to invest in and develop AI should be able to do so in the U.S., while we work to ensure data centers and related facilities can be powered and operated in a clean manner with American-made energy.

Let’s put this into perspective. The global AI manufacturing market is valued at about $7 billion, but it’s expected to explode to $48 billion by 2030. Already industries across every sector are integrating AI into their operations, and in order for this growth to continue, AI needs massive data centers, and data centers need electricity that is always on. Lots of it.

Power demand for data centers that support AI, which only use 3% to 4% of U.S. electricity, will eat up nearly 10% of U.S. electricity supply in 10 years according to the Energy Information Administration. To support this rapid growth, states need to be able to build more baseload power generation, and that’s where EPA comes in. 

EPA wants to increase certainty for owner-operators in the permitting process, making it clear what kind of permits are needed for new and modified projects.

Policies inherited from the Biden administration have been criticized by many as making EPA a brick wall that impedes the growth of the AI industry. 

In addition, much of current Clean Air Act (CAA) requirements for building data centers dates back to the 1990s, when technology was practically prehistoric compared to modern advancements. These rules require companies to install pollution control equipment when they build new facilities or make a change that increases emissions significantly.

The digital revolution has ushered in new needs and new industries which demand new permitting rules that help, not hamper development.

Under President Trump’s leadership, the permitting reform we are looking to undertake, if finalized, will help clear the way for data center and AI development across the U.S., while ensuring that human health and the environment are protected. 

If a power company wanted to restart a plant that had been out of service to meet increased grid demand, under the Biden EPA they had to go through the entire permitting process all over again. 

Under our upcoming proposed rules, if finalized, utilities would be allowed to restart plants much faster, especially in times of emergencies like storm recovery. Anyone who has lost power during or after a weather event knows how critical it is to get back on the grid. 

Through the CAA permitting process, EPA will seek to address the minimum requirements for public participation when it comes to minor emitters so the protest of a few does not unnecessarily thwart progress for all Americans. 

Our permitting reforms will also help expedite construction of essential power generation and industrial facilities. EPA will be a partner to state, local and Tribal air agencies instead of a hindrance.

At EPA, we are also working on redefining preconstruction, which would, if finalized, only require a company to obtain an air permit when the company actually breaks ground.

A company looking to build an industrial facility or a power plant, should be able to build what it can before obtaining an emissions permit. For example, companies could install cement pads or conduct other construction activities that aren’t related to regulated air emissions.

Other countries are racing to be number one. America’s AI leadership depends on our ability to build the infrastructure that powers innovation.

Senate Republicans blasted through Democratic and internal opposition to pass President Donald Trump’s multibillion-dollar clawback package early Thursday morning.

The final vote tally was 51-48, with Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine and Lisa Murkowski of Alaska joining every Democrat in voting against it. The package will now be sent to the House, which has until Friday to pass it. 

The $9 billion rescissions bill tees up cuts to ‘woke’ spending on foreign aid programs and NPR and PBS that Congress previously approved. Republicans have pitched the bill as building on their quest to root out waste, fraud and abuse in the federal government.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., said that it was a mission shared by the GOP and Trump, whose Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) identified many of the cuts included in the package.  

‘I appreciate all the work the administration has done in identifying wasteful spending,’ Thune said. ‘And now it’s time for the Senate to do its part to cut some of that waste out of the budget. It’s a small but important step toward fiscal sanity that we all should be able to agree is long overdue.’

The president’s rescissions package proposed cutting just shy of $8 billion from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and over $1 billion from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), the government-backed funding arm for NPR and PBS.

It’s likely the first of many to come from the White House.

Unlike the previous procedural votes, Vice President JD Vance was not needed to break a tie. Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., voted against the preceding procedural votes to advance the package on Tuesday night, but ultimately backed the bill. 

It now heads to the House, where Republicans have warned the Senate to not make changes to the package. But just like during the budget reconciliation process earlier this month, the warnings from House Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., and fiscal hawks fell on deaf ears in the upper chamber.

The Senate GOP’s version of the bill is indeed smaller, by about $400 million, after Senate leaders agreed to make a carveout that spared international Bush-era HIV and AIDS prevention funding.

Other attempts were made during a marathon vote-a-rama process to make changes to the bill, but none were able to surmount the 60-vote threshold in the upper chamber.

Senate Democrats tried to kneecap the bill with amendments that targeted what they argued were cuts that would diminish emergency alerts for extreme weather and disasters, erode America’s and isolate rural Americans by creating news deserts with cuts to public broadcasting, among others.

‘Why are we talking about cutting off emergency alerts,’ Sen. Maria Cantwell, D-Wash, said. ‘That’s 1,000 times these stations were warned to tell people that their lives were in danger.’

Sen. Patty Murray, D-Wash., the top Democrat on the Senate Appropriations Committee, contended that much more was at stake than the spending cuts.

The Washington Democrat charged that lawmakers were also ‘voting on how the Senate is going to spend the rest of this year, are we just going to do rescission after rescission, because we know Russ Vought is just itching to send us more.’

Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., rebuked Democrats’ assertions against the bill, and pitched the legislation as a way for lawmakers to ‘course-correct’ wasteful spending that shouldn’t have ever been green-lit.

He told Fox News Digital that what Democrats want to do is ‘keep as much of this money for their woke pet projects as they can.’ 

‘They were able to do that for four years,’ he said. ‘That’s how you got to, you know, DEIs in Burma and Guatemalan sex changes and voter ID in Haiti, which is ironic, because Democrats don’t support voter ID here, but they’re willing to pay it for it in another country.’

Fox News Digital’s Bradford Betz contributed to this report. 

A new think tank analysis finds that public corruption is a significant problem in the U.S., and is most prevalent in state and local governments that have larger bureaucracies and higher regulations.

The libertarian Cato Institute said it analyzed Department of Justice data on public corruption convictions in the nation’s 94 federal judicial districts and measured the annual average number of convictions per 100,000 population over the 2004–2023 period.

‘The data show that some of the most corrupt places by this measure match their reputations,’ the authors of the Cato analysis wrote.

Washington, D.C., topped the rankings with 469 total convictions during the nearly 20-year period and an annual conviction rate of 3.49, according to Cato’s report.

‘It has a huge number of legislative and executive branch federal employees, and there are many opportunities for graft,’ the report says.

Louisiana’s eastern district, which includes New Orleans, ranks at number four on Cato’s list with 430 total convictions during this period and an annual conviction rate of 1.29.

‘New Orleans has long been infamous for state and local corruption,’ the report says.

The Cato analysis found that New Hampshire had the lowest public corruption by this metric, with 13 convictions over the period and an annual conviction rate of .05. Cato called it ‘the freest state in the nation with one of the smallest governments.’

Cato said it appeared that ‘larger governments with more spending and regulations create more opportunities for bribery and embezzlement.’ 

The think tank, however, noted that some academic studies have suggested other reasons for corruption differences between states and cities, including varying cultures, education levels, and poverty rates.

Though Senate Republicans were successful in their mission to pass President Donald Trump’s clawback package, not every member of the conference was on board.

Only two Republicans, Sens. Lisa Murkowski, R-Alaska, and Susan Collins, R-Maine, joined with every Senate Democrat to vote against the $9 billion package geared toward clawing back foreign aid and public broadcasting funding.

Senate Republican leaders had hoped that stripping $400 million in cuts to Bush-era international AIDS and HIV prevention funding could win over all the holdouts, both public and private. But the lawmakers who voted against the bill had deeper concerns about the level of transparency during the process and the impact successful rescissions could have on Congress’ power of the purse.  

Collins, who chairs the Senate Appropriations Committee, said she agreed with rescissions in general and supports them during the appropriations process, but couldn’t get behind the White House’s push because of a lack of clarity from the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) about exactly what would be cut and how.

She said that ‘the sparse text’ sent to lawmakers included little detail and did not give a specific accounting of programs that would be cut to hit the original $9.4 billion target.

‘For example, there are $2.5 billion in cuts to the Development Assistance account, which covers everything from basic education, to water and sanitation, to food security — but we don’t know how those programs will be affected,’ she said.

Murkowski demanded a return to legislating and appeared to warn that lawmakers were just taking marching orders from the White House rather than doing their own work. 

Both Murkowski and Collins were also concerned about the cuts to public broadcasting, particularly to rural radio stations. Both attempted to make changes to the bill during the vote-a-rama. Collins’ ultimately decided not to bring her amendment, which would have reduced the total amount of cuts in the bill to north of $6 billion, to the floor. However, Sen. Mark Kelly, D-Ariz., still brought the change for a vote. And Murkowski offered an amendment that would have drastically reduced the cuts to public broadcasting. 

The climactic vote for the bill came hours after tsunami warnings rippled through Alaska, and Murkowski argued that federal warnings were relayed through local public broadcasting. 

‘The tsunami warnings are now thankfully canceled, but the warning to the U.S. Senate remains in effect,’ she said. ‘Today of all days, we should vote down these misguided cuts to public broadcasting.’

Still, both attempts to modify the bill failed to pass muster. 

Their decision to go against the package left some scratching their heads. Sen. Ron Johnson, R-Wis., argued that the cuts amounted to less than a tenth of a percent of the federal government’s entire budget.

‘This should be a chip shot, OK? I have faith in [OMB Director] Russ Vought,’ he said. ‘I have faith in the Trump administration. They’re not going to cut things that are important spending.’

Sen. Eric Schmitt, R-Mo., who is leading the bill in the Senate, rebuked the duo’s arguments and said that lawmakers weighing in on the rescissions package was in line with their legislative duties.

‘That’s exactly what we’re doing,’ the Missouri Republican said. ‘I would hope that maybe what this will also do is highlight some of the wasteful spending, so when we get into the appropriations process in the next few months that we would be more keen to be focused on saving people money.’

Trump’s bill, which would cancel unspent congressionally approved funding, would slash just shy of $8 billion from the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), and over $1 billion from the Corporation for Public Broadcasting (CPB), the government-backed funding arm for NPR and PBS.

Some lawmakers, like Sen. Thom Tillis, who earlier this month voted against Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ over cuts to Medicaid funding, understood where the pair were coming from.

The North Carolina Republican told Fox News Digital that Collins, in particular, would be leading negotiations for an end-of-year bipartisan funding deal with Senate Democrats, and to vote in favor of canceling congressionally approved funding could hurt her ability to find a solution to keep the government funded.

‘I don’t think people really understand the value of your word and your consistency and your living up to commitments and how important that is to getting things done,’ Tillis said. ‘And this, I think, that’s what Susan’s looking at, I think Murkowski is as well, and I respect them for that.’

The State Department on Sunday blasted Yemen’s Iran-sponsored Houthi terrorist movement for lethal attacks on cargo ships in the Red Sea and on Israel as new calls emerged for President Donald Trump to support Yemen’s legitimate government to topple the Houthi regime.

Walid Phares, a leading American expert on the Middle East, told Fox News Digital that regarding ‘negotiations with Hamas and the regime in Tehran, in my view, Iran is simply buying time to rearm and resume its regional expansion.’ 

Phares said if the talks fail, there is a need ‘to reassemble a ground force comprised of units loyal to the legitimate Yemeni government (now in exile in Aden), and—crucially—the Southern Transitional Council (STC), whose forces are based in the Aden region and maintain frontlines adjacent to Houthi-controlled territory. Notably, STC forces have achieved the most significant victories against the Khomeinist militias in past years.’ 

Phares, who advised Trump when he was a candidate for president in 2016, continued, saying that ‘The United States should back, fund, and train these southern forces for renewed ground operations along the Red Sea coast, particularly to retake the vital port city of Hodeidah. Simultaneously, northern units loyal to the Yemeni government could advance toward the capital, Sanaa. Allied airpower would provide the necessary cover to enable a southern-northern pincer movement that could collapse the Houthi hold on Yemen and eliminate the threat entirely.’

He argued that ‘This would pave the way for future negotiations—not with Tehran’s proxies—but with a federated, pro-Western Yemeni government independent of Iranian influence. ‘

In May, Trump announced that after a military air campaign against the Houthi movement, saying the Houthis ‘just don’t want to fight…and we will honor that. We will stop the bombings.’

The Houthi terrorists, however, appear to have violated their pledge to Trump to stop attacks in the Red Sea.

Department of Defense spokesman Sean Parnell told Fox News Digital, ‘The DOD remains prepared to respond to any state or non-state actor seeking to broaden or escalate conflict in the region. Secretary Hegseth continues to make clear that, should Iran or its proxies threaten American personnel in the region, the United States will take decisive action to defend our people. We will not discuss future operations.’

Fox News Digital reported on July 7 that Israel exchanged missile fire with Iran-backed Houthi rebels in Yemen on Monday, targeting the group’s ports and other facilities.

Israel’s initial strikes came in reaction to a suspected Houthi attack on a Liberian-flagged ship in the Red Sea. The vessel was targeted with explosives and small arms fire, causing it to take on water and forcing the crew to abandon ship. The Houthis have not yet claimed responsibility for the attack. Israel’s military issued a warning prior to its attack, which targeted ports at Hodeida, Ras Isa and Salif.

‘These ports are used by the Houthi terrorist regime to transfer weapons from the Iranian regime, which are employed to carry out terrorist operations against the state of Israel and its allies,’ the Israeli military said.

The Houthi attacks last week resulted in the sinking of the bulk carrier Magic Seas, resulting in the presumed killings of four people and 11 others who are missing, according to an AP report.

The announcement came as satellite photos show long, trailing oil slicks from where the bulk carrier Eternity C went down, and another when the Houthis sank the bulk carrier Magic Seas.

The Times of Israel reported that both ships were attacked over a week ago by the rebels as part of their campaign targeting vessels over the war in Gaza. The Houthi campaign has upended shipping in the Red Sea, through which $1 trillion of goods usually passes a year.

A spokesperson for the State Department told Fox News Digital, ‘The United States condemns these attacks. These recent attacks have led to the loss of life, injury to sailors, and the sinking of cargo ships.Houthi attacks continue to endanger the lives of seafarers, harm economies across the region, and risk environmental disaster.’

The spokesperson added, ‘Global freedom of navigation and Israel have been under attack by the Houthi rebels for too long. The U.S. supports Israel’s ability to exercise its right to self-defense.’

After the Biden administration de-listed the Houthi movement as a foreign terrorist organization, the Trump administration swiftly restored the terrorist designation in March. 

The official slogan of the Houthi movement (Ansar Allah) reads, ‘Allah is Greater. Death to America. Death to Israel. Curse on the Jews. Victory to Islam.’ 

Fox News Digital’s Anders Hagstrom and AP contributed to this report.

In recent weeks, some public commentary has accused the Department of Justice of defying court orders and insinuated that Emil Bove’s confirmation will undermine the rule of law. Nothing could be further from the truth. The Department of Justice follows court orders—even when those orders are legally unsound or deeply flawed. And Emil is the most capable and principled lawyer I have ever known. His legal acumen is extraordinary, and his moral clarity is above reproach. The Senate should swiftly confirm him to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit.

This administration has repeatedly been targeted with sweeping, overreaching injunctions, often issued by ideologically aligned judges in defiance of settled law—including orders of the Supreme Court. Time and again, these rulings have been reversed on appeal, and easily so.  The pattern is familiar by now: aggressive district court orders grab headlines, only to be walked back when subjected to the slightest judicial scrutiny. 

Despite this consistent trend, the persistent narrative in the media and in the legal community is that it is the Department of Justice that ignores courts. That is plainly wrong. Disagreements over interpretation do not constitute defiance, any more than does filing an appeal. And, histrionics aside, good-faith disputes over timing and implementation of court orders do not represent insubordination—especially given the very difficult and novel problems presented by implementing the unprecedentedly overbroad and vague court orders imposed on this administration. The Department of Justice invariably complies with court orders no matter how much it disagrees with the underlying reasoning or the egregiousness of the judicial error. The appellate process has always been the means of securing relief from an erroneous order, and it still is.

You will search in vain for any critique of district judges who abuse their power and issue baseless injunctions in the editorial pages of The New York Times, CNN, or even the WSJ—even where those injunctions are reversed or stayed on appeal. 

The same commentators who foment anger over the Department of Justice’s good-faith efforts to comply with legally unsound court orders are silent when Article III judges overreach and issue rulings that interfere with the President’s authority and undermine the rule of law.

That brings me to my friend and colleague, Emil. The dedicated lawyers of the Department of Justice work tirelessly to comply with court orders and to promote the rule of law. There is no finer example of that dedication than Emil. 

In a thankless job, Emil expects excellence and courage from every lawyer in the Department, no matter the opposition faced. He pushes our dedicated lawyers to meet the moment and the mission of defending this administration against those who seek to block President Donald Trump from fulfilling his promises to the American people. And he consistently requires the highest level of integrity from all Department employees. 

Unfortunately, but unsurprisingly, the media has recently amplified slanderous attacks on Emil’s character based on a foundation of selective leaks, misleading reporting, and falsehoods. I am taking this opportunity to clear up a few of those misconceptions.

First, as to the termination of the leaker, it was Attorney General Pam Bondi and I who decided to terminate his employment. It was not Emil’s decision. And contrary to media spin, the employee was terminated for failing to defend his client—the United States of America—in open court; he was not dismissed for admitting an error in court. 

In his courtroom statements, the leaker distanced himself from the Department’s position and attempted to undermine the credibility of his own client. That is not zealous representation. That is an unethical dereliction of duty, which no client should be required to countenance.  

Moreover, Emil has never encouraged lawyers or anyone else to act in defiance of a court order. There was no order to violate at the time of the alleged statements. No injunctive relief had been granted—oral or written. No directive was issued to reverse any executive action. These facts are not in dispute, not even by the leaker. And most critically, after Judge Boasberg did issue an order in the relevant case, the Department fastidiously complied. That is not speculation. That is the explicit position taken by the leaker himself, who signed the government’s brief affirming the United States’ compliance on March 25, 2025. 

The same kind of distortions are being used to attack the Department’s lawful dismissal of the irreparably flawed case against New York Mayor Eric Adams. That decision was reviewed and approved by Department leadership and grounded in sound legal judgment. The judge agreed, granting the government’s motion to dismiss. 

That should end the conversation. But for those who insist on rehashing internal dissent and resignations, it should be obvious that disagreements within the Department do not render a decision unlawful or unethical. To the contrary, Emil’s integrity was displayed when he himself argued the case in favor of dismissal, even as his former colleagues in SDNY retreated. 

Before the Senate Judiciary Committee, Emil attested what those lucky enough to work with him already know to be true: he believes deeply in the rule of law, and in the importance of court orders. And what he has done time and again over the course of his career is bring rigor, integrity, and decency to his work. 

Emil has the backbone for hard cases, the restraint to wield judicial authority judiciously, and the intellect to master complexity. He will decide cases fairly. He will apply the law as written. He will not bend to political pressure. And that is exactly the kind of judge our country needs.

Emil is a dedicated public servant, an exemplary lawyer, and a person of quiet strength and deep character. 

The Senate should reject the smear campaign and vote to confirm him to the Third Circuit. Justice demands nothing less.