Photo credit: abcnews.go.com
NEW YORK — Mayor Eric Adams finds himself grappling with significant legal and political challenges.
The first-term Democrat awaits a ruling from a judge on a request made by the Justice Department to dismiss a federal indictment that alleges he accepted extravagant travel benefits and illicit campaign contributions from foreign entities seeking to exert influence over him.
Additionally, he is under pressure regarding the potential political implications, particularly concerning whether Governor Kathy Hochul might pursue his removal from office. This follows worries that he may have compromised his ability to govern independently by relying on the Trump administration to assist in resolving his legal predicament.
During a recent hearing, Adams testified under oath, asserting that no quid pro quo was promised to defer his criminal charges. However, a government attorney contended that dismissing the case was vital for Adams to assist in the Trump administration’s immigration policies—an argument that has heightened worries about the mayor’s allegiances.
Currently, U.S. District Judge Dale E. Ho is considering the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the case, which encompasses several serious allegations, including conspiracy, wire fraud, and bribery.
Acting Deputy U.S. Attorney General Emil Bove stated that the Justice Department is acting on “prosecutorial discretion,” invoking a Trump executive order directed at minimizing the misuse of prosecutorial power.
Bove expressed that the ongoing charges impede Adams’ governance capabilities and hinder his bid for a second term. He insisted that terminating the case would allow Adams to contribute to vital national security and immigration efforts prioritized by the Republican leadership.
The Justice Department has also indicated a desire to retain the right to revive the case in the future, with plans for the incoming Manhattan U.S. Attorney to revisit the situation after the upcoming November elections.
Adams maintains his innocence, having pleaded not guilty to all charges.
Meanwhile, the situation has led to the resignation of seven prosecutors in protest, including Manhattan’s leading federal prosecutor, who stepped down rather than comply with Bove’s directive.
Interim U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon, a Republican, has accused Adams’ legal team of offering a quid pro quo related to immigration and labeled the situation as a “breathtaking and dangerous precedent” that could undermine democratic integrity.
In a resignation letter, prosecutor Hagan Scotten articulated profound concerns regarding governmental coercion of elected officials to align with policy goals.
On Friday, seven former Manhattan U.S. attorneys—including notable names like James Comey—issued a supportive statement regarding Sassoon’s stance on maintaining integrity within the judicial process.
Additionally, a former Watergate prosecutor has filed documents urging Judge Ho to reject the government’s request and to consider appointing an independent special prosecutor for the case.
While no timetable has been established for a ruling, Judge Ho mentioned during the hearing that he would make a decision soon.
“It’s not in anyone’s interest for this to drag on,” Ho remarked, emphasizing the necessity for careful deliberation.
Ho noted that his role in this matter is rather limited, as it is uncommon for judges to reject motions to dismiss when both parties are in agreement.
Adams’ attorney, Alex Spiro, pointed out that historically, no appellate court has favored a decision in favor of a judge whose dismissal motion was opposed. Previously, such requests were routinely granted without needing judicial approval until about 80 years ago.
As it stands, Adams’ trial is slated to commence on April 21, coinciding with a competitive atmosphere as he faces several challengers in the upcoming June Democratic primary.
Although Hochul, an ally of Adams, has so far resisted the notion of utilizing her authority to remove him, recent developments, including the resignations of key aides, have prompted her to reconsider her position.
Hochul held meetings with influential community leaders and political figures to assess the situation and gauge the best course of action moving forward. Following these discussions, some participants indicated that Hochul is awaiting Judge Ho’s ruling before making any definitive moves.
The removal process would be akin to a judicial proceeding, allowing Adams to respond to the charges brought against him.
There is considerable uncertainty surrounding the potential ramifications of such an action, drawing parallels to historical cases, including a nearly century-old incident involving Governor Franklin D. Roosevelt and Mayor Jimmy Walker, who vacated his position to evade prosecution.
While this week, Hochul mentioned the possibility of using her unique powers, she refrained from confirming any readiness to act.
“Overturning the will of the voters is a serious step that should not be taken lightly,” she articulated, acknowledging the seriousness of the allegations surrounding Adams’ conduct.
In recent days, Adams has maintained a defiant posture, comparing requests for his resignation to extreme historical references and asserting his determination to remain in office.
During the hearing, Adams appeared optimistic, even sharing light-hearted comments with the judge and displaying confidence as he exited. He affirmed that he was untroubled by the Justice Department’s intentions to potentially renew the case later.
Adams expressed, “I have not committed a crime and I don’t see them bringing it back. I’m not afraid of that.”
Continuing his public engagements, Adams has plans to attend various speaking events while also becoming more selective in his interactions with the media, recently opting out of press briefings.
When questioned about this shift, Adams retorted, “Because y’all are liars.”
Source
abcnews.go.com