Dear Reader,

The federal prosecution of New York City Mayor Eric Adams is, effectively, over.

The reason, we’re told by the new Justice Department bosses, has nothing to do with the charges against the mayor or the strength of the prosecution’s evidence. (Why would those trifling concerns matter?) Rather, new DOJ honcho Emil Bove (a friend and former colleague of mine at the Southern District of New York) instructed the SDNY in a disjointed letter to dump the case based on a madcap blend of conspiracy theories, claims of political persecution, and good old-fashioned illogic.

As a reminder, the Adams indictment, which dropped in September 2024, charges Adams with federal crimes including conspiracy, bribery, and solicitation of foreign campaign contributions. Prosecutors allege that Adams solicited and accepted two types of improper benefits from Turkish officials and nationals: (1) free or heavily discounted luxury travel, and (2) illegal foreign campaign contributions, funneled to the Adams campaign through “straw donors.” In return, Adams allegedly used his official power to shortcut the safety-inspection process on a skyscraper known as “Turkish House,” to the satisfaction of his foreign benefactors.

The evidence looked solid, if not quite overwhelming. Among many texts cited in the indictment, at one point Adams instructed a campaign staffer to accept a donation from a wealthy Turkish national (in violation of federal campaign finance law): The foreign businessman “is ready to help. I don’t want his willing to help be waisted [sic],” Adams texted.

Still, this wasn’t a smoking-gun case – few are, and most corruption cases lend themselves to some variation of “This is how politics works” and “There was no quid pro quo” defenses. I wouldn’t predict that Adams was surely cooked had he gone to trial, but the odds would’ve been stacked against him, as they always are in federal court (especially in the SDNY). Now, we’ll never know.

Bove’s letter instructing SDNY prosecutors to drop the case is a piece of work. He starts by noting that “[t]he Justice Department has reached this conclusion without assessing the strength of the evidence or the legal theories on which the case is based.” Might want to consider those tidbits in the future, but at least they’re not pretending this is based on the actual merits.

The letter moves on to Reason Number One: It was all political. It’s tough to untangle the mess of accusations here, but it seems, in DOJ’s view, that Adams was indicted as payback for his public criticism of the Biden administration’s immigration enforcement strategy. Thus, the indictment was intended to influence the 2024 presidential election and Adams’s own 2025 re-election. Because, what would’ve happened, you see, is that voters would’ve said to themselves, “Hmmm, this guy criticized Biden, then he got indicted, so therefore I’ll be voting for Biden and against Trump” or something. (I warned you up front, it’s a mess). Also relevant: The letter cites no evidence to support its claims of the SDNY’s political motivation. Why prove it when you can just allege it in conclusory fashion?

Bove’s letter then proceeds to Reason Number Two: The guy’s mayor, and he needs to do his job without these pesky distractions. By that reasoning, of course, no public official should ever be charged with a crime. Good news for every senator, governor, assemblyperson, mayor, and dog-catcher in America: If a federal indictment might impede you from doing your job, you’re in the clear!

The letter then plunges into a bizarre comparison between the Trump administration’s emphasis on immigration enforcement and the Biden administration’s release of Viktor Bout, a convicted arms trafficker, in exchange for American hostages. It’s just Biden Roulette at this point: We’re doing this because Joe Biden (spins wheel…) Pardoned his son! Tried to forgive student debt! Fell off his bike! Or whatever.

So where does the case go from here? Could the acting U.S. attorney for the SDNY, Danielle Sassoon, take an Elliott Richardson-like stand and resign rather than carry out a corrupt order? Don’t count on it. (I don’t know Sassoon; she started at the SDNY after I left.) Just last week, she penned a bizarre op-ed criticizing Biden’s pardons. The substance of the article is fine, if conspicuously untimely. But the fact that she wrote such an overtly political screed sent SDNY alum text chains blazing, “WTF,” “embarrassing,” and “pandering bullshit” among the most common reactions. And even if the acting U.S. attorney did take a principled stand, she’d surely be fired and replaced with somebody who would dismiss the case as directed by the bosses in D.C. A protest resignation would make a statement, but it wouldn’t alter the fate of the Adams case.

And what if the judge refuses to grant the dismissal motion? Again, that’s theoretically possible, though it too would be a purely ceremonial act. Even if the judge kept the case on the docket notwithstanding the request to dismiss, DOJ would have an easy counter-move: Ghost it. Good luck carrying through with the case without anybody standing at the prosecution table. 

The letter does technically leave open the possibility that the Adams case could be reopened somewhere down the line. Justice Department brass orders only that the indictment be dismissed “without prejudice,” meaning it can theoretically be revised in the future. But that’s a transparent sop; once this case is dismissed, it’s never coming back.

Dismissal of the case against Adams is an obvious injustice. Maybe he’d have beaten it, maybe not, but let a jury decide that. Of broader concern, the letter from DOJ shows a disturbing willingness – eagerness, even – to distort the truth, to make dramatic claims based on zero proof, to reward sycophants for their loyalty, and to use DOJ letterhead for political screeds.

Adams will walk, and that’s unfair. But DOJ’s justification for its action portends more, and worse, ahead.

Stay Informed,

Elie