Judge Weighs DOJ’s Request to Drop Eric Adams’ Case \ Newslooks \ Washington DC \ Mary Sidiqi \ Evening Edition \ At a high-stakes federal hearing, the Justice Department urged a judge to dismiss corruption charges against NYC Mayor Eric Adams, while Adams insisted he had committed no crime. Judge Dale Ho delayed his ruling, acknowledging the case’s political and legal implications ahead of Adams’ April 21 trial. The request, made over objections from Manhattan prosecutors, has triggered multiple resignations within the DOJ and accusations of political interference by the Trump administration.
DOJ Seeks to Drop Corruption Charges Against Eric Adams: Quick Look
- The Justice Department urged a federal judge to dismiss corruption charges against NYC Mayor Eric Adams, citing prosecutorial discretion and national security concerns.
- Judge Dale Ho did not issue an immediate ruling, stating he needed time to review the highly unusual request.
- Adams testified under oath, declaring: “I have not committed a crime.”
- The DOJ’s dismissal request was made over objections from Manhattan prosecutors, triggering multiple resignations.
- Seven prosecutors, including Manhattan’s top federal prosecutor, resigned rather than comply with the order to drop the case.
- Gov. Kathy Hochul is considering removing Adams from office, amid concerns he struck a deal with the Trump administration.
- Legal experts and former prosecutors are calling for a special prosecutor, fearing the case’s dismissal is politically motivated.
- The judge’s decision could reshape the case and spark a constitutional battle over the DOJ’s independence.
Deep Look
In a highly unusual legal showdown, the Justice Department’s second-in-command urged a federal judge Wednesday to dismiss corruption charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams, arguing that the case was interfering with national security priorities and the mayor’s ability to govern.
Judge Dale E. Ho, however, declined to rule immediately, stating he needed more time to evaluate the extraordinary circumstances of the request, which has sparked widespread controversy, resignations within the DOJ, and accusations of political influence by the Trump administration.
Adams, who pleaded not guilty to the corruption charges last September, vehemently denied any wrongdoing under oath.
“I have not committed a crime,” Adams declared in court.
The case, which revolves around alleged illegal campaign contributions and luxury perks from Turkish officials, has become a political and legal firestorm ahead of the mayor’s June Democratic primary and April 21 trial date.
Judge Ho Faces a Legal and Political Crossroads
For more than an hour, Judge Ho grilled prosecutors and Adams’ legal team, questioning the legal and ethical implications of the DOJ’s attempt to withdraw its own charges.
Acknowledging the case’s political weight, Ho stated:
“I’m not going to shoot from the hip right here on the bench.”
However, he emphasized that a quick decision was necessary, given the pending trial date and the impact on Adams’ reelection campaign.
DOJ’s Justification: A Matter of “Prosecutorial Discretion”
The DOJ’s request to dismiss the case came directly from Washington, bypassing Manhattan’s federal prosecutors, many of whom resigned in protest rather than comply.
Acting Deputy U.S. Attorney General Emil Bove, arguing on behalf of the DOJ, insisted that the judge had no choice but to accept the dismissal, calling it a “straightforward exercise in prosecutorial discretion.”
Bove denied accusations that the decision was politically motivated, even as Judge Ho pressed him about whether there had been a “quid pro quo” agreement between Adams and the DOJ.
“I don’t concede and I don’t think it’s correct that even if there was a quid pro quo there would be any issue with this motion,” Bove asserted.
This statement alarmed legal experts, as it appeared to suggest that even if the dismissal were politically motivated, it would still be legally valid.
Why the DOJ Wants the Case Dropped
The DOJ’s request to drop charges appears to be tied to Trump’s executive order on the “weaponization” of the justice system and a memo from Attorney General Pam Bondi outlining similar concerns.
According to Bove, the case is “interfering with national security and immigration enforcement”, a claim that has sparked skepticism among legal experts.
Prosecutors in Manhattan, including then-interim U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon, strongly objected to the DOJ’s reasoning, arguing in an internal letter to Bondi that:
“Dismissing the charges in return for Adams’ cooperation on immigration policy would be a blatant abuse of the criminal justice system.”
Sassoon further alleged that prosecutors were on the verge of filing additional obstruction of justice charges against Adams before the DOJ’s intervention.
Mass Resignations and Internal DOJ Turmoil
The DOJ’s handling of the case has caused significant internal upheaval, with at least seven prosecutors resigning, including:
- Danielle Sassoon, Manhattan’s top federal prosecutor, who refused to request dismissal.
- Hagan Scotten, a veteran prosecutor who wrote in his resignation letter:“It would take a fool or a coward to follow this order. I am neither.”
Bove, in response, accepted Sassoon’s resignation and suspended two other prosecutors with pay, stating they had engaged in a “politically motivated prosecution” in defiance of DOJ leadership.
Eric Adams: “I’m Not Afraid” of Future Charges
Despite the intense scrutiny, Adams appeared visibly more confident in court compared to previous hearings.
Upon entering the courtroom, he embraced Black clergy members seated in the front row, projecting an air of defiance.
When questioned by Judge Ho about the DOJ’s provision allowing charges to be refiled in the future, Adams doubled down on his innocence:
“I have not committed a crime. I’m not afraid of that.”
Calls for a Special Prosecutor
As the case takes on national significance, legal experts and former prosecutors are calling for independent oversight.
- Seven former U.S. attorneys, including James Comey, Geoffrey Berman, and Mary Jo White, released a statement supporting Sassoon’s decision to uphold the case.
- Three other former U.S. attorneys filed motions suggesting Judge Ho appoint a special prosecutor if he finds the DOJ acted improperly.
- A former Watergate prosecutor also urged Ho to reject the government’s motion and consider appointing a special counsel to review the DOJ’s actions.
These calls reflect widespread concern that the DOJ’s move to drop the case undermines the integrity of the justice system.
What Happens Next?
Judge Ho is now faced with a historic decision:
- Grant the DOJ’s request, allowing Adams to walk free—for now—while leaving the door open for charges to be refiled after the election.
- Reject the motion, forcing the case to proceed as scheduled, potentially exposing the DOJ to a major constitutional battle over executive influence.
- Appoint a special prosecutor, which could prolong the case and raise questions about Trump’s role in the decision to dismiss the charges.
As the April 21 trial date looms, Adams continues to face intense political scrutiny, with Democratic Gov. Kathy Hochul weighing whether to remove him from office over concerns that he may have struck a deal with Trump’s DOJ.
The next few weeks will determine whether Adams’ legal troubles fade away or escalate into a full-blown constitutional crisis—one that could redefine the limits of presidential influence over the justice system.
Judge Weighs DOJ’s Judge Weighs DOJ’s Judge Weighs DOJ’s
