Judge Summons Prosecutors to Court to Discuss Decision to Drop Case Against Eric Adams
Judge Dale Ho has set a hearing for Wednesday.
TroibNews 
NEW YORK — A federal judge has summoned New York City Mayor Eric Adams and federal prosecutors to court on Wednesday to discuss the Trump administration’s bid to dismiss the criminal case against the mayor. This development has led to a crisis within the Justice Department and created upheaval in the Adams administration.
U.S. District Judge Dale Ho issued an order on Tuesday requiring Adams, his legal team, and prosecutors to be ready to address the rationale behind seeking to dismiss the case, the reasons why Adams has consented to this motion, and the process for resolving it.
This order marks the first sign that Judge Ho might not accept the Justice Department's attempt to derail the case, which includes allegations of bribery and other corruption against Adams. While some legal analysts suggest the judge has limited authority to oppose the dismissal, others believe he could deny the request to drop the charges. The advocacy organization Common Cause has called for Ho to appoint a special prosecutor to oversee the case.
The push to dismiss the case originated with Emil Bove, a top official at the Justice Department, who instructed the Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office to pursue a dismissal against Adams, a Democrat.
In a memo, Bove claimed the case was “improperly interfered” with the mayor’s reelection campaign and might undermine his ability to champion Trump’s immigration policies. Bove further stated that this decision was not influenced by the strength of evidence or the legal foundations of the case.
Bove’s directive to withdraw the case led to a series of resignations from attorneys in the U.S. attorney’s office and within the Justice Department in Washington. Danielle Sassoon, the acting U.S. attorney in Manhattan, alleged that Bove and Adams appeared to be involved in an inappropriate agreement.
Sassoon detailed in her resignation letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi a meeting on January 31 with Adams’ legal team, wherein she said “Adams’s attorneys repeatedly urged what amounted to a quid pro quo, indicating that Adams would be in a position to assist with the Department’s enforcement priorities only if the indictment were dismissed.”
Sassoon contended that dismissing the case would effectively reward Adams for “an improper offer of immigration enforcement assistance in exchange for a dismissal of his case.”
Hagan Scotten, a lead prosecutor in the Adams case, supported Sassoon’s claims of impropriety in his own resignation letter.
Although Adams and his attorneys have consistently denied any quid pro quo, they acknowledged in a February 3 letter that “if Mayor Adams is removed from office, he would be replaced at least temporarily by Public Advocate Jumaane Williams, a frequent outspoken critic of Mayor Adams’s desire to protect New Yorkers by combating the migrant crisis.”
Sassoon had anticipated Ho’s response to the Justice Department’s attempt. In her resignation letter, she alerted Bondi that dismissing the case wouldn’t be a straightforward process, as Ho would likely conduct a “searching inquiry” into the reasons behind the dismissal. She warned that the outcome could be “detrimental to the Justice Department’s reputation, regardless of outcome.”
Aarav Patel contributed to this report for TROIB News
U.S. District Judge Dale Ho issued an order on Tuesday requiring Adams, his legal team, and prosecutors to be ready to address the rationale behind seeking to dismiss the case, the reasons why Adams has consented to this motion, and the process for resolving it.
This order marks the first sign that Judge Ho might not accept the Justice Department's attempt to derail the case, which includes allegations of bribery and other corruption against Adams. While some legal analysts suggest the judge has limited authority to oppose the dismissal, others believe he could deny the request to drop the charges. The advocacy organization Common Cause has called for Ho to appoint a special prosecutor to oversee the case.
The push to dismiss the case originated with Emil Bove, a top official at the Justice Department, who instructed the Manhattan U.S. attorney’s office to pursue a dismissal against Adams, a Democrat.
In a memo, Bove claimed the case was “improperly interfered” with the mayor’s reelection campaign and might undermine his ability to champion Trump’s immigration policies. Bove further stated that this decision was not influenced by the strength of evidence or the legal foundations of the case.
Bove’s directive to withdraw the case led to a series of resignations from attorneys in the U.S. attorney’s office and within the Justice Department in Washington. Danielle Sassoon, the acting U.S. attorney in Manhattan, alleged that Bove and Adams appeared to be involved in an inappropriate agreement.
Sassoon detailed in her resignation letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi a meeting on January 31 with Adams’ legal team, wherein she said “Adams’s attorneys repeatedly urged what amounted to a quid pro quo, indicating that Adams would be in a position to assist with the Department’s enforcement priorities only if the indictment were dismissed.”
Sassoon contended that dismissing the case would effectively reward Adams for “an improper offer of immigration enforcement assistance in exchange for a dismissal of his case.”
Hagan Scotten, a lead prosecutor in the Adams case, supported Sassoon’s claims of impropriety in his own resignation letter.
Although Adams and his attorneys have consistently denied any quid pro quo, they acknowledged in a February 3 letter that “if Mayor Adams is removed from office, he would be replaced at least temporarily by Public Advocate Jumaane Williams, a frequent outspoken critic of Mayor Adams’s desire to protect New Yorkers by combating the migrant crisis.”
Sassoon had anticipated Ho’s response to the Justice Department’s attempt. In her resignation letter, she alerted Bondi that dismissing the case wouldn’t be a straightforward process, as Ho would likely conduct a “searching inquiry” into the reasons behind the dismissal. She warned that the outcome could be “detrimental to the Justice Department’s reputation, regardless of outcome.”
Aarav Patel contributed to this report for TROIB News
