海角大神

Uproar over Mayor Adams deepens concern about Justice Dept. politicization under Trump

When President Donald Trump entered office last month, promising to clean up what he described as a politically 鈥渨eaponized鈥� American justice system, few would have guessed that the Democratic mayor of New York City would be an early benefactor.

But efforts over the past two weeks by Mr. Trump鈥檚 U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) to dismiss an indictment against Mayor Eric Adams have, for critics, only fueled allegations that the justice system is weaponized. There are signs that the crisis in the department has spread beyond the Adams case.

Mayor Adams faces five counts of violating federal anti-corruption laws, though he has maintained his innocence. But in a surprise move last week, acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove instructed DOJ prosecutors in the Southern District of New York to drop the case.

The order has triggered a political, legal, and ethical firestorm that experts say surpasses 鈥渢he Saturday Night Massacre鈥� of Watergate. So far, seven career DOJ prosecutors have resigned instead of following Mr. Bove鈥檚 order. They have alleged a quid pro quo between Mr. Adams and the Trump administration, in which the government鈥檚 case was dropped in exchange for the mayor cooperating with Mr. Trump鈥檚 deportation efforts.

Both Mr. Adams and Mr. Bove have denied a quid pro quo, though the move to dismiss without prejudice would give the Justice Department the option of bringing charges again, thereby keeping Mayor Adams beholden to the Trump administration, critics say.

The Department of Justice did not respond to a request for comment.

More broadly, recent weeks have seen a wave of DOJ resignations larger than any since Watergate, when White House pressure led to the agency鈥檚 leadership quitting in protest. The actions of Trump appointees in the agency, who say they鈥檙e working to end what they call the political weaponization of the justice system, appear to be having the opposite effect.

鈥淩egardless of political leanings, most people want the justice system to be fair and treat everyone charged with crimes similarly, regardless of who they are,鈥� says Cara Pierce, a former federal prosecutor, in an email.

鈥淲e lose faith in the justice system when the party in power investigates and charges their political opponents without sufficient evidence, and the same is true when powerful people avoid liability for their crimes because of their position,鈥� she adds.

Wave of resignations in protest

On his first day in office, Mr. Trump signed an executive order instructing agencies to end 鈥渢he weaponization of the federal government.鈥� Mr. Bove, who defended Mr. Trump when the Justice Department prosecuted him during the Biden administration, determined last week that the order meant the Adams case should be dropped.

But to do that, he needed a department prosecutor to sign the motion to dismiss.

Danielle Sassoon, the acting head of the聽Southern District of New York and a Trump appointee, wrote to Attorney General Pam Bondi on Feb. 12 that she wouldn鈥檛 drop the case. If DOJ leadership didn鈥檛 reconsider, she added, she was prepared to resign.

Mr. Bove accepted her resignation the next day.

Two of Ms. Sassoon鈥檚 deputies in New York immediately stepped down, including one 鈥� Hagan Scotten, an assistant U.S. attorney leading the Adams prosecution 鈥� who emailed a fiery to the acting deputy attorney general. A 鈥渇ool鈥� or 鈥渃oward鈥� may eventually file the motion to dismiss, he wrote. 鈥淏ut it was never going to be me.鈥�

Next, Mr. Bove turned to the DOJ鈥檚 Washington headquarters. After meetings with senior prosecutors in the public integrity section, three quit rather than sign the motion. So did the acting chief of the department鈥檚 criminal division. Eventually, a senior career prosecutor in the public integrity section agreed to sign the dismissal motion, reportedly to protect the jobs of younger lawyers.

The agency indicted Mr. Adams, a retired New York police captain who was elected mayor in 2021, five months ago. The indictment charges him with five counts of violating federal anti-corruption laws, alleging that he accepted over $100,000 in gifts from Turkish nationals in exchange for favors, such as helping open a Turkish consular building despite fire safety concerns.

At the heart of the Justice Department鈥檚 crisis is a core disagreement over the duty of a federal prosecutor. In her letter to Attorney General Bondi, Ms. Sassoon noted that Mr. Bove鈥檚 reasons for ending the Adams prosecution have 鈥渘othing to do with the strength of the case.鈥�

The evidence against Mr. Adams 鈥減roves beyond a reasonable doubt that he committed federal crimes,鈥� . 鈥淢y duty as a prosecutor [means] prosecuting a validly returned indictment regardless whether its dismissal would be politically advantageous, to the defendant or to those who appointed me.鈥�

In his letter accepting her resignation, Mr. Bove saw it differently.

Accusing her of 鈥渋nsubordination鈥� and 鈥渕isconduct,鈥� he said Ms. Sassoon鈥檚 duty to follow orders from the DOJ鈥檚 political appointees outweighed any legal or ethical concerns she might have.

鈥淚n no valid sense do you uphold the Constitution by disobeying direct orders implementing the policy of a duly elected President,鈥� .

Breaking with norms of DOJ management

The president and Justice Department leadership do 鈥渉ave the ability and authority to decide which prosecutions to approve and dismiss,鈥� says Richard Schechter, who served in the Justice Department for three decades, in an email. But 鈥渢his authority must be exercised within Constitutional, legal and ethical limits.鈥�

There is a difference between agency leadership making broader policy decisions and inserting itself into specific cases, experts say.

A new DOJ leadership has every right to change department policy and focus resources on different areas. There is nothing wrong, for example, with Attorney General Bondi ordering the department to focus on border security and immigration enforcement. But it is problematic for agency leadership to try to influence specific cases.

鈥淧olicy determinations are appropriately made by political officials,鈥� says Rebecca Roiphe, a former Southern District of New York prosecutor. 鈥淏ut when it comes to a particular case ... partisan concerns [cannot be] among them.鈥�

According to former prosecutors in the Adams case, partisan concerns have been part of the push to dismiss the prosecution.

In her letter, Ms. Sassoon described a January meeting with Mr. Bove and Mr. Adams鈥� attorneys, during which she said the mayor鈥檚 lawyers 鈥渞epeatedly urged what amounted to a quid pro quo,鈥� suggesting that if the indictment were dropped, the mayor could assist in the Trump administration鈥檚 immigration enforcement efforts. The agreement to dismiss the case, she added, 鈥渨as negotiated without my office鈥檚 awareness or participation.鈥�

In his letter accepting her resignation, Mr. Bove wrote that claims of a quid pro quo are 鈥渇alse.鈥� Instead, the prosecution should be dismissed because it鈥檚 politically motivated, he argues. The investigation 鈥渁ccelerated鈥� after Mayor Adams publicly criticized President Joe Biden鈥檚 failed immigration policies, he wrote. The case was also led by Damian Williams, a former U.S. attorney. Mr. Williams, he said, has 鈥渄eep connections鈥� with former Attorney General Merrick Garland, who 鈥渙versaw the weaponization of the Justice Department.鈥�

Ms. Sassoon wrote in her letter that Mr. Williams was one of four U.S. attorneys who oversaw the Adams investigation. And he 鈥渄id not manage the day-to-day investigation.鈥�

鈥淎 court is likely to view the weaponization rationale as pretextual,鈥� she concluded. 鈥淢oreover, dismissing the case will amplify, rather than abate, concerns about weaponization of the Department.鈥�

Concerns about weaponization of the justice system have been brewing for years.

During the first Trump administration, the Justice Department faced in its investigation into Russia鈥檚 interference in the 2016 election and its interactions with the Trump campaign. Mr. Trump and his supporters continue to claim that prosecutions related to his efforts to stay in power after his 2020 election defeat were politically motivated. (There is no confirmed evidence that Mr. Biden ordered any investigation into Mr. Trump.)

Will Judge Ho reject the dismissal motion?

This week, concerns about political weaponization in the Justice Department appear to have spread beyond the Adams case.

Denise Cheung 鈥� a department prosecutor for 24 years who was leading the criminal division 鈥� resigned after agency leadership asked her to open a criminal investigation into a contract the Biden administration entered. According to , she was forced to resign after saying there wasn鈥檛 鈥渟ufficient evidence鈥� to begin an investigation.

The Adams case has now landed in a Manhattan courtroom. On Wednesday, DOJ officials laid out their arguments before U.S. District Judge Dale Ho as to why they want to end the prosecution. It鈥檚 rare for a dismissal motion to be rejected by a judge 鈥� especially, as in this case, when both parties support it. But in some cases, judges have rejected such a motion because they felt it didn鈥檛 serve 鈥渢he public interest.鈥�

Judge Ho now must determine who is acting in 鈥渢he public interest鈥�: the DOJ leadership or the federal prosecutors who have resigned en masse. As the judge untangles the dueling narratives, one persists. At the Wednesday hearing, according to reports, Mr. Bove said the government鈥檚 discretion regarding the dismissal is 鈥渧irtually unreviewable in this courtroom.鈥�

鈥淣ow you have accusations [of weaponized justice] going back and forth, and it鈥檚 going to undermine public confidence,鈥� says Bruce Green, a former聽Southern District of New York prosecutor.

鈥淚f you鈥檙e inclined to the Trump side of things, you鈥檙e going to have your suspicions of the previous Justice Department reinforced. If you鈥檙e [not], you鈥檙e going to have your suspicions of the current Justice Department reinforced,鈥� he says.

鈥淚 can鈥檛 see how that鈥檚 a good state of affairs.鈥�