Skip to main content
Hemlock Collective Logo Hemlock Collective
Rule of law

Whistleblower: Plotting to Defy Federal Courts

Exposed
Case Dossier FED-LAW-001
STATUS
Exposed
SEVERITY
Critical
DATE
2025-06-24
DOMAIN
Rule of Law
SUBDOMAIN
Institutional Subversion
CAPTURE VECTOR
Executive supremacy
TAGS
doj whistleblower immigration alien-enemies-act emil-bove contempt-of-court erez-reuveni
Back to Case Files
Whistleblower complaint by 15-year DOJ veteran Erez Reuveni reveals a conspiracy by senior leadership to systematically defy federal court orders regarding mass deportations, with top officials explicitly instructing staff to disregard judicial rulings.

Summary

On June 24, 2025, a whistleblower complaint by Erez Reuveni, a decorated 15-year DOJ attorney, exposed a high-level conspiracy within the Department of Justice to subordinate the judiciary to the executive. Reuveni was fired in April after truthfully informing a federal judge that an immigrant had been deported in error. His complaint details a pattern of “defiance and noncompliance” regarding the administration’s aggressive deportation goals under the Alien Enemies Act.

Capture Mechanism: The “F*** You” Doctrine

The complaint documents a specific meeting on March 14, 2025, where the administration’s contempt for the rule of law was made explicit.

  • The Actor: Emil Bove, a senior DOJ official and President Trump’s nominee for a lifetime seat on the U.S. Court of Appeals.
  • The Directive: Discussing the rapid deportation of alleged Venezuelan gang members, Bove instructed staff that “the planes need to take off no matter what.”
  • The Defiance: When the possibility of court orders blocking the flights was raised, Bove allegedly stated that the department should consider telling judges “f* you**” and ignoring the orders.

Institutional Cover-Up

Reuveni’s firing demonstrates the enforcement mechanism of this capture:

  1. Punishing Truth: Reuveni was fired for “doing his job and telling the truth to the court” regarding a mistaken deportation.
  2. Deceiving the Judiciary: The complaint suggests that DOJ representations made to U.S. District Judge James Boasberg regarding flight times were false, part of a broader effort to evade judicial review until the deportations were faits accomplis.

Analysis

This case moves beyond “legal creativity” or “aggressive enforcement” into Constitutional Crisis. When the Department of Justice—the agency charged with upholding the rule of law—plans to explicitly defy Article III courts, the separation of powers has functionally collapsed. The executive branch is asserting a “sovereign exception” where its policy goals supersede judicial authority.