Justice Department lawyers and New York City Mayor Eric Adams are set to face a federal judge who is signaling that he’s unlikely to rubber stamp their request to drop the mayor’s corruption charges weeks before an April trial.
Judge Dale E. Ho in Manhattan scheduled the Wednesday afternoon hearing after three government lawyers from Washington made the dismissal request on Friday. Manhattan’s top federal prosecutor resigned after she refused an order to do so.
Ho already indicated that the hearing was likely to be only an initial step when he wrote in an order Tuesday that one subject on the agenda will be a discussion of “procedure for resolution of the motion.”
Also set for discussion are the reasons for the request to dismiss the indictment against the Democrat that charges the first-term mayor with accepting over $100,000 in illegal campaign contributions and lavish travel perks from a Turkish official and business leaders seeking to buy his influence while he was Brooklyn borough president. He has pleaded not guilty.
Early last week, Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove told prosecutors in New York in a memo to drop the charges because the prosecution “has unduly restricted Mayor Adams’ ability to devote full attention and resources to the illegal immigration and violent crime.” He said charges could be reinstated after November’s mayoral election.
Two days later, then-interim U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon wrote to Attorney General Pam Bondi, saying Bove’s request to drop charges in return for assistance in enforcing federal immigration laws would betray Bondi’s own words that she “will not tolerate abuses of the criminal justice process, coercive behavior, or other forms of misconduct.”
“Dismissal of the indictment for no other reason than to influence Adams’s mayoral decision-making would be all three,” Sassoon, a Republican, said of what she called a “quid pro quo” deal as she offered to resign. She also said prosecutors were about to bring additional obstruction of justice charges against Adams.
Bove responded to Sassoon with apparent anger, accepting her resignation and accusing her of “pursuing a politically motivated prosecution despite an express instruction to dismiss the case.” He then informed her that two prosecutors assigned to the case were suspended with pay and that an investigation would determine if they keep their jobs.
If either of those prosecutors wished to comply with his directive to dismiss charges, he welcomed them to do so, but Hagan Scotten quit the following day, writing in a resignation letter that he supported Sassoon’s actions.
Scotten wrote to Bove that it would take a “fool” or a “coward” to meet his demand to drop the charges, “but it was never going to be me.”
In all, seven prosecutors, including five high-ranking prosecutors at the Justice Department in Washington, had resigned by Friday.
Since then, a small army of former prosecutors have gotten behind the defiant stand by Sassoon and other prosecutors.
On Friday, seven former Manhattan U.S. attorneys, including James Comey, Geoffrey S. Berman and Mary Jo White, issued a statement lauding Sassoon’s “commitment to integrity and the rule of law.”
On Monday, three former U.S. attorneys from New York, New Jersey and Connecticut submitted papers to Ho suggesting that he appoint a special prosecutor if he finds the Justice Department acted improperly or that he order all evidence be made available to state and local prosecutors.
A former Watergate prosecutor filed papers separately, telling the judge to reject the government’s request and consider assigning a special counsel to explore the legal issues and ultimately consider appointing an independent special prosecutor to try the case.
Also Monday, Justice Connection, an organization advocating for Justice Department employees, released a letter signed by over 900 former federal prosecutors to career federal prosecutors that said they have “watched with alarm” as values “foundational to a fair and justice legal system” have been tested.
In the letter, the former prosecutors said they “salute and admire the courage many of you have already exhibited. You have responded to ethical challenges of a type no public servant should ever be forced to confront with principle and conviction, in the finest traditions of the Department of Justice.”
On Tuesday, Alex Spiro, a lawyer for the mayor, wrote to the judge, saying those who believed that Adams struck a “quid pro quo” with prosecutors were wrong.
“There was no quid pro quo. Period,” he said.
