Judge Ho made clear that #EricAdams is presumed innocent, & noted that the #DOJ’s motion was made without reference to the strength of the case.
The judge asked about the agreement to #dismiss the case against Adams without prejudice, meaning prosecutors could bring charges again if they were so inclined.
The judge asked Adams directly about consent to the motion. Adams is waiving certain rights by consenting & the judge wants to make sure Adams is aware of that & is doing so voluntarily.
The judge addressed his first question to #EmilBove, as the parties began to discuss the fact that prosecutors are seeking dismissal of the case without prejudice.
The judge asked whether there are any limits to circumstances in which the govt could bring charges in the future. This line of questioning is highly relevant: It’s been noted that dismissing the case without prejudice effectively gives the #Trump #DOJ a means of controlling the mayor.
The fact that #EmilBove affirmed that the charges could be brought again is a big deal. It is that circumstance — the idea that the charges could be resurrected after the November mayoral election — that has created the notion that #EricAdams will remain under #Trump’s thumb through the duration of his first term in office.
Bove says that while the DOJ could revisit the charges against the mayor, “I don’t have any plans for that at this time.”
Judge Ho established that the government’s motion to #dismiss is not predicated on the strength of the case. #EmilBove agreed that that’s correct, & the judge asked him for a high-level explanation of the rationale behind the motion. Bove said that the case has “appearances of impropriety” & represents an abuse of the #criminal justice system.
Bove says that there are several ongoing investigations at the #DOJ in which the purpose of the #EricAdams prosecution is being scrutinized.
#EmilBove may be referring to investigations into prosecutors who resigned rather than agree to seek the case’s dismissal. Bove said last week that those inquiries would be initiated.
Judge Ho asks Bove about his assertion that the prosecution is interfering w/the 2025 mayoral election. Bove responds that the mayor’s very presence in court today “is part of the problem,” adding that the case is hindering the performance of the mayor’s duties.
That’s some weak sauce, it is highly unusual to abandon a case against a public official simply because they’re high-ranking enough to have serious responsibilities w/which a prosecution would interfere.
By #EmilBove’s logic, no public official who oversees a large city or state or other govt entity could be prosecuted because a #criminal case would inhibit them from carrying out their duties. As we know, many major political figures have indeed been charged while in office before.
Judge Ho asks #EmilBove for other examples in which his reasoning has been invoked in a decision to abandon an indictment, in which the defendant is a public ofcl w/serious responsibilities. Bove says he’s not aware of one, but says that prosecutors have invoked foreign policy interests in order to make justice-related decisions. He brings up the case of Viktor Bout, a Russian arms dealer who was released in a prisoner swap for the basketball player Brittney Griner.
#EmilBove calls the abandonment of the #EricAdams case “a standard exercise of prosecutorial discretion,” a ridiculous thing to say. Judge Ho moves on & asks if Bove’s rationale would be similar if the police commissioner were subject to a similar investigation. Bove says yes.
This means, in effect, that the #DOJ will prioritize officials’ cooperation w/ #Trump’s agenda over whether they are heeding the #law.
#EmilBove concedes that #EricAdams can have his security clearance restored even if the case proceeds undermines a central contention in his argument for the case’s dismissal.
In his Feb 13 letter to #DanielleSassoon, the first US atty who resigned, Bove wrote that a lack of security clearance meant, “He cannot speak to federal officials regarding imminent security threats to the city.…This situation is unacceptable & directly endangers the lives of millions of New Yorkers.”
The idea that #EmilBove is expanding his theory of “prosecutorial discretion” to a police commissioner under investigation is remarkable for several reasons: 1, it’s novelty; 2, because it appears as if he is expanding the #immunity that #SCOTUS recently granted to presidents to all manner of officials, including the men & women who head the city’s PD; & 3, two of the mayor’s former police commissioners remain the focus of inquiries by the same prosecutor’s office that charged the mayor.
Judge Ho brings up a letter sent by #EricAdams’s defense team to #DOJ officials earlier this month. The letter makes many of the arguments that eventually appeared in #EmilBove’s order to prosecutors seeking to #dismiss the case, &, when they didn’t obey him, the dismissal motion to which he signed his name. Alex Spiro, one of Adams’s lawyers, acknowledges that the government motion echoes arguments he has made for months.
The judge then turns to #EmilBove’s order to the acting US attorney in Manhattan, #DanielleSassoon, instructing her to abandon the case. The judge asks whether Ho can consider what is in the memo, & Bove says “no.” He says that case #law suggests that Ho does not have the discretion to do so, even as he acknowledges whether a judge is entitled to inquire whether the order was made “in bad faith.”
“There is no basis to question my representations to this court,” #EmilBove says, arguing again that the judge cannot consider the memo Bove sent last week to the acting US atty in Manhattan ordering the case’s dismissal.
Bove now addresses the allegations that #EricAdams arranged the dismissal of his case in exchange for his further cooperation with #Trump’s #immigration agenda. He says Judge Ho has already addressed that in the questions he asked the mayor earlier.
There have been at least 2 requests that Judge Ho allow amicus curaie “friend of the court” briefs from outsiders that would argue against the government’s request to drop the charges. One request came from 3 former US attorneys & another came from Common Cause, a good-government advocacy group. The judge just referred to those requests & no surprise #EmilBove indicated he has some objections to them.
Judge Ho asks Alex Spiro, a lawyer for #EricAdams, about his assertion in a letter that Adams did not promise further assistance with federal #immigration efforts in exchange for the case’s abandonment. Spiro says he was responding “to anyone who suggests such a thing, because it never happened.” He offers to swear an oath in court to that effect but Ho does not ask him to do so.
#EmilBove continues to insist that the judge’s questioning of the mayor earlier mooted any talk of a #QuidProQuo arrangement between the government & the mayor. “You have a record, undisputed, that there is no quid pro quo,” he says.
Bove is telling the judge that if #EricAdams & the #DOJ say so, he must accept that there was no quid pro quo to drop the case.
It is worth noting that #DanielleSassoon, the former head of the Manhattan prosecutor’s office, said there was indeed a #QuidProQuo offered by #EricAdams’s lawyer in a meeting she attended, & that one of her prosecutors took notes & got scolded for doing so by #EmilBove, who had the notes collected at the end of the meeting.
