周三纽约的一名联邦法官驳回腐败指控反对市长埃里克·亚当斯，但不是以特朗普政府想要的方式。
法官戴尔·何(Dale Ho)带着偏见驳回了此案，这意味着它不能被重新提起。
司法部寻求得到这个箱子然而，为了释放亚当斯以配合市长的移民议程，该部门希望该案件在没有偏见的情况下被驳回，这意味着它可以再次被提起。
亚当斯被起诉去年在纽约南区被指控五项罪名，涉嫌与不当利益、非法竞选捐款和试图掩盖事实有关的长期阴谋。他辩称无罪。
何鸿燊拒绝支持DOJ期望成果.
“根据DOJ的理论，不带偏见地驳回该案会造成一种不可避免的看法，即市长的自由取决于他执行政府移民执法优先事项的能力，他可能更依赖于联邦政府的要求，而不是他自己的选民的愿望。这种出现是不可避免的，它建议带着偏见解雇，”何决定。
法官做出裁决后，司法部发言人表示，拜登执政期间提起的亚当斯案“是政治武器化和资源浪费的一个例子。”
“我们专注于逮捕和起诉恐怖分子，同时让司法部回到保护美国人安全的核心使命上来，”这位发言人补充道。
何长达78页的意见推翻了司法部宣布的解雇理由:这样亚当斯就可以专注于特朗普政府的移民优先事项。
法官说，他找不到政府驳回对一名当选官员的指控，以使该官员能够促进联邦政策目标的其他例子。
“DOJ的移民执法理由是前所未有的，令人惊叹的，”何说。“DOJ声称它有‘实际上不可复审的’以此为基础驳回指控的许可，这种说法的广度令人不安，这意味着公职人员如果遵守现任政府的政策优先事项，可能会得到特别豁免。这一建议根本不符合法律面前人人平等的基本前提。”
何还明确表示，他没有权衡案件的事实，并表示他的决定“不是关于亚当斯市长是无辜还是有罪。”
尽管如此，亚当斯的律师对撤销指控的决定表示欢迎，而不用担心在11月的市长选举后这些指控会被重新提起——正如司法部所威胁的那样。
亚当斯的律师亚历克斯·斯皮罗在一份声明中说:“埃里克·亚当斯的案子从一开始就不应该提起，今天这个案子终于永远结束了。”。“从第一天起，市长就坚持自己是无辜的，现在埃里克·亚当斯和纽约人的正义得到了伸张。”
亚当斯周三在格雷西大厦外的讲话中重复了这一观点。
亚当斯说:“让我澄清一下，就像我一直说的那样，这个案子本来就不应该提起，我也没做错什么。”“我现在很高兴，我们的城市终于可以结束这本书，专注于我们伟大城市的未来。”
亚当斯还拿起了卡什·帕特尔2023年的书《政府黑帮》，这位现任美国联邦调查局导演在书中写道呼吁司法部的“全面大扫除”。
“我将鼓励每一个纽约人阅读它，”亚当斯说。“读一读，你就会明白我们绝不能允许这种事情发生在另一个无辜的美国人身上。”
驳回指控的决定是在亚当斯的律师推动在4月3日为市长候选人提交请愿书以参加6月初选的最后期限之前驳回指控的几天后做出的。亚当斯表示，他将在初选中以民主党人的身份参加竞选，尽管反对者批评他最近几个月讨好特朗普政府，会见总统并参加他的就职典礼，而不是参加该市预定的马丁·路德·金日活动。
何鸿燊的决定是根据保罗·克莱门特(Paul Clement)的建议做出的，克莱门特曾在布什政府担任副检察长，并被何鸿燊任命为对该案的独立评估.
克莱门特说:“不带偏见的驳回会产生一种明显的感觉，即起诉书中概述的并经大陪审团批准的起诉可能会被重新提起，这种前景就像谚语中的达摩克利斯之剑一样悬在被告头上。”。
最终的解雇在一封措辞严厉的信之后从代理美国司法部长丹妮尔·沙宣到美国司法部长帕姆·邦迪，这表明代理副总检察长艾米尔·博韦和DOJ领导层的其他成员明确知道亚当斯的律师提出的交换条件，称亚当斯对特朗普移民政策的口头支持将通过撤销对他的起诉而得到加强。
由唐纳德·特朗普总统任命的沙宣和其他几名DOJ职业官员一起辞职以示抗议。
亚当斯的律师斯皮罗对沙宣辞职后的交换条件的想法表示反对:“有交换条件的想法完全是谎言。我们什么也没提供，这个部门也没向我们要求什么。”
Mayor Eric Adams' case dismissed with prejudice despite Trump admin's request to allow for later prosecution
A federal judge in New York on Wednesdaydismissed corruption chargesagainst Mayor Eric Adams, but not in the way the Trump administration wanted.
Judge Dale Ho dismissed the case with prejudice, meaning it cannot be revived.
The Justice Departmentsought to have the casedismissed to free up Adams to cooperate with the mayor's immigration agenda, however, the department wanted the case dismissed without prejudice, meaning it could be brought again.
Adamswas indictedlast year in the Southern District of New York on five counts in an alleged long-standing conspiracy connected to improper benefits, illegal campaign contributions and an attempted cover-up. He had pleaded not guilty.
Ho declined to endorse the DOJ'sdesired outcome.
"In light of DOJ's rationales, dismissing the case without prejudice would create the unavoidable perception that the Mayor's freedom depends on his ability to carry out the immigration enforcement priorities of the administration, and that he might be more beholden to the demands of the federal government than to the wishes of his own constituents. That appearance is inevitable, and it counsels in favor of dismissal with prejudice," Ho decided.
Following the judge's decision, a Justice Department spokesperson said the Adams case, which was brought during the Biden administration, "was an example of political weaponization and a waste of resources."
"We are focused on arresting and prosecuting terrorists while returning the Department of Justice to its core mission of keeping Americans safe," the spokesperson added.
Ho's 78-page opinion dismantled the Justice Department's stated rationale for dismissal: so Adams could focus on the Trump administration's immigration priorities.
The judge said he could find no other example of the government dismissing charges against an elected official to enable the official to facilitate federal policy goals.
"DOJ's immigration enforcement rationale is both unprecedented and breathtaking in its sweep," Ho said. "And DOJ's assertion that it has 'virtually unreviewable' license to dismiss charges on this basis is disturbing in its breadth, implying that public officials may receive special dispensation if they are compliant with the incumbent administration's policy priorities. That suggestion is fundamentally incompatible with the basic premise of equal justice under the law."
Ho also made clear he was not weighing the facts of the case and said his decision "is not about whether Mayor Adams is innocent or guilty."
Still, Adams' lawyer celebrated the decision to drop the charges without the fear of them being revived after the mayoral election in November -- as the Justice Department had threatened.
"The case against Eric Adams should have never been brought in the first place -- and finally today that case is gone forever," Alex Spiro, Adams' lawyer, said in a statement. "From Day 1, the mayor has maintained his innocence and now justice for Eric Adams and New Yorkers has prevailed."
Adams echoed that sentiment in remarks outside Gracie Mansion on Wednesday.
"Let me be clear, as I've said all along, this case should have never been brought and I did nothing wrong," Adams said. "I'm now happy that our city can finally close the book on this and focus solely on the future of our great city."
Adams also held up Kash Patel's 2023 book, "Government Gangsters," in which the now-FBI directorcalled fora "comprehensive housecleaning" of the Justice Department.
"I'm going to encourage every New Yorker to read it," Adams said. "Read it and understand how we can never allow this to happen to another innocent American."
The decision to dismiss the charges came just days after Adams' lawyer had pushed for them to be dismissed ahead of the April 3 deadline for petitions to be submitted for mayoral candidates to get on the June primary ballot. Adams has said he will run as a Democrat in the primary despite criticism from opponents he has cozied up to the Trump administration in recent months, meeting with the president and attending his Inauguration instead of scheduled Martin Luther King Day events in the city.
The decision by Ho followed the recommendation from Paul Clement, who served as solicitor general under the Bush administration and was appointed by Ho to makean independent assessment of the case.
"A dismissal without prejudice creates a palpable sense that the prosecution outlined in the indictment and approved by a grand jury could be renewed, a prospect that hangs like the proverbial Sword of Damocles over the accused," Clement said.
The eventual dismissalcame after a scathing letterfrom acting U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi, suggesting acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove and other members of DOJ leadership were explicitly aware of a quid pro quo suggested by Adams' attorneys, saying Adams' vocal support of Trump's immigration policies would be boosted by dismissing the indictment against him.
Sassoon, who was appointed by President Donald Trump, resigned in protest along with several other career DOJ officials.
Spiro, Adams' lawyer, balked at the notion of a quid pro quo following Sassoon's resignation: "The idea that there was a quid pro quo is a total lie. We offered nothing and the department asked nothing of us."
