President Trump’s efforts to manipulate the American justice system to suit his political agenda reached a new low last week. His administration’s disregard for ethical governance collided head-on with the commitment to integrity shared by federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York and Washington, D.C. The conflict, sparked by Trump’s lieutenants at the Justice Department, including his former personal lawyer, Emil Bove III, and Manhattan’s interim U.S. Attorney, Danielle R. Sassoon, highlights the dangerous corruption seeping into the administration’s handling of the law.
This clash is a stark example of the Trump administration’s increasingly brazen use of coercion, loyalty tests, and dishonest tactics to push its policy agenda. Such tactics extend beyond Washington, infiltrating local policies as well, including the Justice Department’s interference in New York City’s governance. In particular, it is evident in the efforts to drop corruption charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams in exchange for political support, particularly on issues like immigration.
Last September, when Adams was indicted on multiple federal charges, including wire fraud and bribery, this board called for his resignation. The ongoing fallout from the Justice Department’s apparent attempt to shield him from legal consequences underscores the urgency of his stepping down. If he refuses, state officials must investigate him further and, if necessary, prosecute him. New York City voters also hold significant power to address the issue in the upcoming primary elections.
What makes the Justice Department’s actions particularly alarming is that top officials are not only turning a blind eye to corruption but are actively attempting to corrupt the very institutions that should ensure the law is applied impartially. This was made clear in resignation letters from Ms. Sassoon and her colleague, Hagan Scotten, both of whom refused to comply with Bove’s dishonest orders to drop the charges against Adams. Their letters outline why such demands represent a severe violation of democratic principles and the rule of law.
Ms. Sassoon, in her resignation letter to Attorney General Pam Bondi, warned that dismissing Adams’ charges would set a dangerous precedent. Similarly, Mr. Scotten argued that no government should use the threat of dropping or reinstating charges to force an elected official into supporting its policy goals.
Adams, who became the first sitting mayor in modern New York history to face a criminal indictment, has since tried to align himself with Trump, even asking for a pardon. After a deal appeared to be struck, Adams made a public appearance with Trump’s immigration czar, Thomas Homan, where they discussed opening an Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) office at the city’s Rikers Island jail, a move that directly contradicts New York law. Homan made it clear that Trump expected Adams to back his administration’s aggressive stance on immigration enforcement, with consequences if he failed to comply.
While both Adams and his lawyers deny any quid pro quo, Sassoon’s letter highlights how the mayor’s lawyers repeatedly pushed for a deal where Adams would support Trump’s immigration policies in exchange for the dismissal of his charges.
Trump’s Justice Department is sending a message to the country that it intends to subvert impartiality, ignore legal precedents, and treat the justice system as a tool for political leverage. The administration’s pursuit of dismissing charges against Adams “without prejudice” indicates that the case could be reopened if he falls out of line with Trump’s agenda.
As the corruption surrounding Adams deepens, New York City is left with a mayor unfit to lead, whose ongoing legal troubles are compounded by his political alignment with Trump. Many leading political figures in New York have already called for his resignation, and they should continue to push him to step down. If he refuses, state prosecutors must hold him accountable for any illegal actions.
Although Governor Kathy Hochul has wisely resisted calls to remove Adams through executive action, the City Charter offers a more appropriate route for removing a mayor who is no longer fit for office. State and local officials should continue pressing for Adams’ resignation and ensure he is held accountable for his misconduct.
The resilience of prosecutors, civil servants, and political leaders in standing up to these abuses of power is crucial in defending the rule of law. While public outcry may not immediately sway Trump or Attorney General Bondi, the legal challenges to their actions must continue. The federal district judge handling the Adams case, Dale Ho, may still take a hard look at the government’s conduct, and public hearings into these matters could shed light on the true nature of the administration’s attempts to subvert justice.
The courage of the prosecutors who resigned rather than comply with Trump’s order serves as a powerful reminder of the importance of upholding democratic norms and the rule of law. Unlike Trump’s inner circle, these individuals have put duty and the country’s best interests above political loyalties.