A federal judge in New York City has ordered attorneys for the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and Mayor Eric Adams to appear in court Wednesday, February 18, 2025, to address the DOJ’s controversial decision to drop corruption charges against Adams.
The ruling follows accusations of a quid pro quo arrangement between the mayor and the Trump administration.
The order, issued by U.S. District Judge Dale E. Ho, came a day after former Watergate prosecutor Nathaniel Akerman urged the court to deny the DOJ’s motion to dismiss the case and appoint a special counsel to investigate.
Akerman argued in a six-page filing that the dismissal was “not in the public interest” and appeared to be part of a “corrupt bargain” granting the Trump administration leverage over Adams.
“DOJ’s own internal documents show that the dismissal of the Adams indictment is not based on innocence or lack of evidence, but rather on an improper agreement in which Adams would assist the administration’s immigration enforcement priorities,” Akerman wrote in the amicus curiae brief.
He warned that dismissing the case “without prejudice”—allowing the DOJ to refile charges later—leaves Adams vulnerable to political pressure from the administration.
DOJ’s Justification Sparks Outrage
Adams, indicted in September 2024 on bribery, wire fraud, and conspiracy charges related to Turkish donations to his mayoral campaign, had pleaded not guilty. His trial was set for April.
However, on February 10, 2025, acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove—formerly a personal defense attorney for Donald Trump—ordered prosecutors in the Southern District of New York (SDNY) to dismiss the charges.
In his memo, Bove stated that the decision was made “without assessing the strength of the evidence or the legal theories on which the case is based.”
Instead, he cited concerns that the prosecution was improperly interfering with Adams’ 2025 mayoral campaign and hindering his ability to address illegal immigration and violent crime—two priorities of the Trump administration.
The move led to a wave of resignations from career prosecutors, including acting U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon. In a letter to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, Sassoon alleged that Bove sought dismissal of the case in exchange for Adams’ cooperation with federal immigration enforcement in Manhattan.
Sassoon also detailed a January 31, 2025, meeting between DOJ officials and Adams’ defense attorney, Alex Spiro, where Adams’ legal team allegedly implied that his assistance with immigration enforcement depended on the charges being dropped. She wrote that Bove “admonished” a prosecutor who took notes during the meeting and later ordered those notes collected.
Legal and Political Fallout
Judge Ho’s Tuesday order requires DOJ attorneys and Adams’ legal team to explain the reasoning behind the dismissal motion and clarify the mayor’s “consent in writing.” The judge also requested details on the procedure for resolving the matter.
Spiro has denied any improper agreement, stating in a letter to the court that the case was dropped because it was “exceptionally weak on the merits.”
However, Akerman and other critics argue that the case raises serious concerns about political interference in federal prosecutions.
The hearing on Wednesday is expected to shed light on whether the DOJ’s actions were legally justified or politically motivated.
