Dale E.
On Monday night, three former U.S. lawyers from New York, New Jersey and Connecticut filed a brief asking a judge to see if the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss Adams case is in the public interest or just to ensure it is an excuse to ensure it is guaranteed. Extensive inquiries. The mayor's cooperation with the Trump administration's anti-immigration policy.
Earlier in the day, the common reason was a good government advocacy group asking the judge to deny the Ministry of Justice’s motion, which was called part of the “corrupt Quid pro quo bargaining.” The group asked the judge to consider appointing an independent special prosecutor to continue the case.
The New York Bar Association, with more than 20,000 lawyers as members, said in a statement that the order “cuts the rule of law” by Emil Bove III, a senior Justice official. the core of the “searching facts”.
The legal and political crisis, which covers the Justice Department and the New York City Hall, raises questions about Mr. Adams' future and the independence and probability of federal prosecutions.
Last year, Democrat Mr. Adams was indicted on five charges, including bribery, fraud and solicitation of illegal foreign campaign donations. He pleaded not guilty and planned to go to trial in April. But last week, Mr. Bauff's prosecutor in Manhattan and Washington refused to comply with his orders, including Danielle R. Sasan on Friday, Mr. Bauff himself signed a formal request that Judge Ho is now Will be considered.
The law has made judges reject the prosecutor’s request to revoke criminal charges. But Mr. Adams' case may be an exception.
In their profile, the former U.S. lawyer listed more than a dozen questions they said they needed to answer to decide whether to approve the department’s request to dismiss the case “no bias.” With this result, the Trump administration can resume allegations.
“The danger here is not just about internal prosecutor disputes in individual cases,” the former U.S. lawyer wrote. “The public frenzy that has emerged over the past week has drawn respect for the rule of law and the administration and judiciary of our country's government. worries about the distribution of power between them.”
The former supreme prosecutor who submitted the summary was John S. Martin Jr., who served in the southern New York area; Robert J., and Deirdre M. Daly, who served in Connecticut.
The document was filed by lawyers from the Pro Bono company's free and fair litigation team; they asked Judge Hu to accept surrender as a summary of “friends of the court.” In it, they advocated support for his authority to conduct fact-findings on the Justice Department’s actions.
Mark Pomerantz, an attorney who filed the summary, agreed that the prosecution should be concluded.
“We want to represent a view that no parties are interested in introducing them to the court,” Pomerentz said.
Nick Akerman, a lawyer for the common cause, also asked his organization to be heard as a friend of the court, noting that because the government had agreed to Mr. Adams dismiss the indictment, no one represented the public before the judge.
He asked Judge Ho to consider appointing an independent prosecutor for state Sen. Zellnor Myrie, a Democrat running for mayor, last week. Stephen Gillers, a legal ethics expert at New York University’s School of Law, said it was an unusual but reasonable remedy.
Professor Gilles said that if Judge He ordered the government to conduct the case and refused, the judge might explore the possibility of appointing a special prosecutor.
Professor Gilles said: “He will defend the interests of the grand jury and the court itself without letting the case die.”
The New York City Bar Association statement said Mr. Bauff's request that would allow the Trump administration to restore allegations against Mr. Adams, which is “clearly political.”
“The New York City government's policy choice cannot or appears to depend on the Justice Department's decision to prosecute or refuse to file allegations of corruption against the mayor,” the statement said.
Former interim U.S. Attorney, Ms. Sassoon, used Mr. Burf's order to terminate the prosecution as an order to mock the prosecution, a revocation of the charge in exchange for the mayor's mass deportation of President Trump support in political goals.
“I cannot agree to be fired for improper consideration,” Ms. Sassoon wrote in a letter to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi.
Ms Sasan said in the letter that the prosecutor was ready to file a charge that would accuse the mayor of destroying the evidence and directing others to do the same.
Mr. Adams's lawyers called it a false claim. He said if prosecutors had evidence that the mayor had destroyed the evidence: “They would make these allegations because they kept threatening to do so.”
Ms. Sasan resigned instead of obeying, and at least six prosecutors in New York and Washington did the same.
Mr. Bove's orders designated his decision to dismiss the case had nothing to do with his legal advantage, and eventually signed a motion with two other Washington prosecutors, Edward Sullivan and Antoinette T. Bacon.
On Monday night, Justice Connect, a support Department of Justice employees, faces “an unprecedented attack on their work, integrity, well-being and security” and is threatened with resignation or work in New York and Washington.
It was signed by more than 850 former federal prosecutors and was signed with colleagues in the department. Among the signers is special counsel Jack Smith, who conducted two federal criminal investigations into Mr. Trump.
The Judicial Connection letter said: “You have dealt with some type of moral challenge and should not be forced to face principles and beliefs.”
“Generations of former federal prosecutors watch with pride and admiration and are ready to support this glorious pursuit of yours.”
