Last year, Mayor Eric Adams was indicted by federal prosecutors on charges of bribery and corruption. Months later, the case became the center of both local and federal controversy as the Justice Department moved to dismiss it, prompting allegations of a corrupt deal between Adams and the Trump administration. The mayor has long professed his innocence and has denied claims of any deal-making between himself and the federal government. As we wait for the case’s fate to get settled before a federal judge, here’s a look back at where things stand.
What’s happening right now?
On February 14, the Justice Department officially moved to dismiss Adams’s bribery case. But instead of approving that request, U.S. District Judge Dale Ho, who has presided over the matter, ordered Adams and Justice Department officials into court to discuss their reasoning for it.
At the hearing, Adams’s attorney Alex Spiro and acting U.S. deputy attorney general Emil Bove rejected the notion of a “quid pro quo” between the mayor and the federal government, and Adams asserted under oath that he wasn’t promised anything in exchange for agreeing to the motion. Ho then adjourned Adams’s trial for the time being while appointing Paul Clement, a veteran conservative litigator and former U.S. solicitor general, to present arguments against dismissing the case. The judge set a deadline to receive briefs on March 7 with the possibility of an oral argument on March 14. In these situations, judges generally allow cases to be dismissed when both the prosecution and the defense are in agreement. But Ho’s decision to have Clement argue against the motion is a signal that the judge could be open to bucking the trend.
Since then, Adams’s legal team has filed a new motion seeking the dismissal of the charges against him, alleging prosecutorial misconduct in connection to leaked letters from Justice Department officials, which they argue were prejudicial toward Adams. The mayor’s lawyers requested the charges be dropped “with prejudice,” meaning that they couldn’t be brought against Adams in the future. In response, Ho ordered the Justice Department to file any potential opposition to that motion by March 7.
What was the case about again?
In September, Damian Williams, the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York, announced an indictment against Adams, alleging a nearly decade-long scheme in which he knowingly solicited illegal campaign contributions and luxury travel benefits from foreign nationals beginning during his tenure as Brooklyn borough president. In exchange, the filing alleges that Adams facilitated the opening of the new Turkish Consulate in 2021 by pressuring the New York City Fire Department to allow the building to open without clearing a required fire inspection. Prosecutors also claim that Adams often failed to declare the costly international flights and hotels on his required disclosure forms and created fake invoices to hide the perks.
Adams faces five charges: one count of conspiracy to receive campaign contributions from foreign nationals and commit wire fraud and bribery, one count of wire fraud, two counts of soliciting campaign contributions from foreign nationals, and one count of soliciting and accepting a bribe. His trial was initially slated to begin in April.
Since the indictment was unsealed, Adams has faced a chorus of calls for his resignation. But the mayor has maintained his innocence in the matter, vowing to continue his work at City Hall with no intentions of resigning. “I’m not stepping down. I’m stepping up,” Adams said that month.
What did the Justice Department do?
In February, the newly Trump-ified Justice Department asked Manhattan prosecutors to drop its own pending case against Adams. In a memo, Bove cited the possibility of political influence in the prosecution, specifically naming the now former U.S. Attorney Williams, whom Adams’s lawyers have accused of bias. But he made clear that his request was really about something else: Adams’s abilities to complete his duties as mayor, particularly in addressing immigration and crime, two of President Trump’s top priorities.
Bove notably said the department reached this decision “without assessing the strength of the evidence” and asked that the case be dropped “without prejudice,” meaning that the charges could potentially be brought up against Adams in the future.
In a brief address, Adams reiterated his innocence and signaled his eagerness to put this chapter of his life behind him. “Now, we can put this cruel episode behind us and focus entirely on the future of our city. It’s time to move forward,” Adams said.
What was the fallout?
The effects of the Justice Department’s memo were immediate. Danielle Sassoon, the interim U.S. Attorney whose office undertook the case under her predecessor, rejected Bove’s request and resigned from her post rather than fulfill it. It was later revealed that Sassoon had written a letter to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi and expressed her concerns about Bove’s directive, alleging that the agreement discussed by Adams’s attorneys and Justice Department officials amounted to a “quid pro quo” in exchange for the mayor’s assistance with federal immigration enforcement.
“Rather than be rewarded, Adams’s advocacy should be called out for what it is: an improper offer of immigration enforcement assistance in exchange for a dismissal of his case,” Sassoon wrote.
Sassoon was not alone. At least six Justice Department officials would go on to resign from their positions as Bove sought to reassign the case to the department’s Public Integrity Section and have one of its prosecutors sign off on his directive.
The tumult extended beyond Washington, D.C., and the federal government. Four of Adams’s deputy mayors — Maria Torres-Springer, Meera Joshi, Anne Williams-Isom, and Chauncey Parker — announced their intention to resign following the Justice Department’s move to dismiss Adams’s case.
Adams himself has denied the existence of a “quid pro quo” between him and the Trump administration. “I want to be crystal clear with New Yorkers: I never offered — nor did anyone offer on my behalf — any trade of my authority as your mayor for an end to my case. Never,” he said in a statement.
Could Adams just get a pardon from President Trump?
As the spotlight on Adams has grown, so has his relationship with the president. The pair shared a dais at the annual Al Smith Memorial Dinner as then-candidate Trump publicly compared their legal plights during his remarks, suggesting Adams was targeted by the Biden administration for his criticism of its handling of the migrant crisis. “We were persecuted, Eric. I was persecuted, and so were you, Eric,” Trump said in October.
Notably, Adams did not denounce Trump’s overtures toward him and made a pointed effort to meet with him following his win in the 2024 election. As the mayor traveled to Florida to meet with the incoming president and even traveled to attend his inauguration in D.C., speculation grew that Adams sought to be in Trump’s good graces in the hopes of receiving some reprieve with his federal case under a new administration.
For his part, Adams rebuffed the rumors, saying that it’s part of his job as mayor to work with whoever is in the White House for the betterment of New York City. “I’m not going to be warring with this administration,” the mayor said in December. “I’m going to be working with this administration.”
Despite their friendlier interactions, Trump has yet to utilize his federal pardon power to assist Adams despite invoking it in other situations, such as with the January 6 rioters. With the Justice Department currently intervening on Adams’s behalf, it’s unclear if that will change.
Though Adams’s case is currently on hold, he is still contending with record unpopularity as well as a difficult path to reelection. Recent polls found the incumbent mayor trailing behind some of his Democratic challengers as well as former governor Andrew Cuomo, who has yet to officially join the race.
