As you probably know, Hagan Scotten, an assistant U.S. attorney, was asked to dismiss the corruption indictment against NYC mayor Eric Adams after U.S. Attorney Danielle Sassoon (a Republican) resigned from the Department of Justice rather than be involved in dismissing a criminal indictment on political tit-for-tat grounds. Here’s Scotten’s own letter of resignation to Trump’s goon Emil Bove, who ordered Sassoon to get Scotten to do the dirty work.
You can download the letter here from the NYT.
The last sentence of the second paragraph will live on as a defense of our Republic, which I fully believe will stand over the next four years.
h/t: David
Re: “The last sentence of the second paragraph” —- It so saddens me that this even needs to be said at all. The U.S has very much undergone a coup, albeit a new kind of coup. Even being in Canada, I feel threatened by the active malevolence and spite emanating from Trump’s regime. I am very sorry for the honest and law-abiding folk now enduring this in your country. A general strike might be called for.
I was wondering about a general government workers’ strike. This being an attempt to change the narrative which has been that the bad people are doing bad things, and the good people are reeling backward and being put off balance.
But that is easy for me to say. I do not work for the federal government and I know where my next paycheck is coming from.
What you are calling a ‘coup’, most people call an ‘election’. You may have heard of ‘elections’. Apparently, they have them even in Canada.
I agree that Trump was elected. He won the election. What has been happening since his inauguration is not normal. A president allowing an unelected, unvetted, possibly criminally inclined tech billionaire and his “crew” to hollow out any government services willy-nilly, killing whatever section they wish to, and accessing citizens’ private (and ostensibly secure) data is far from normal. It is this fruit of the election of Trump that is the thing that could be seen as a coup ( they are doing things in an illegal manner, without following normal admin procedures). This is definitely not the program the voters cast their ballots for.
The American people elected Trump to eliminate DEI (in the public sector). He has moved against DEI. The American people elected Trump to end gender woo. He has moved against gender woo. The American people elected Trump to enforce the border. He has done so. He has the right to appoint anyone (including Elon Musk) as he sees fit. The office Musk runs was created by Obama.
Sorry to say, but you sound a bit like a cultist. And the Obama whataboutery is hilarious. The MAGA crowd just can’t objectively find fault in anything Trump…thus the cult moniker.
The Supreme Court will likely decide this, but it is on the face unconstitutional for the executive branch to impound funds authorized by congress and to eliminate agencies authorized by congress by firing all the agencies’ employees. And there are numerous long-standing rules in the executive branch against allowing private citizens who have not been vetted to access things like the Treasury database. So no, the president doesn’t have the right to appoint anyone to do anything he pleases. That would be a dictatorship.
And I don’t know what you’re talking about with Obama. DOGE was entirely a creation of Musk and originally Ramaswamy. If it were just an advisory group, fine, but it’s so much more than that, it is de facto running the government. That would be a coup.
The former President (I think his name was Biden) had Dylan Mulvaney over to the White House. He was normal. Trump is not normal.
Did people who voted for Trump want or expect him to blindly gut a number of government agencies that provide various various essential services? The department of Veterans Affairs being but one strange example.
It’s a brilliant letter and, in the penultimate sentence of the penultimate paragraph, puts on notice anyone who would sign such a recommendation for dismissal. Well, someone has stepped forward, ostensibly to protect the attorneys that remain.* Now it’s up to the judge whether to accept the recommendation. I read that judges typically do accept such recommendations to dismiss, but this case may not be over yet.
*https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/justice-department/justice-department-moves-dismiss-eric-adams-case-extraordinary-interna-rcna192294
Here’s some context about “protecting the people who remain:” Directing an assistant US Attorney (an employee) to file for dismissal of a case (or, similarly, a chief of police directing an officer to stop an investigation) is likely a lawful exercise of managerial authority irrespective of the motives, even if the motives are corrupt. Failing to comply with such a directive would likely be insubordination and grounds for dismissal even of employees who have some sort of “tenure.” “Lawful,” here, means something technical.
Any judge that agrees to the dismissal of this case would be in clear violation of Section 100.2 (A)(B)(C) of the New York Code of Judicial Conduct and should be removed from the bench:
Section 100.2 A judge shall avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all of the judge’s activities.
(A) A judge shall respect and comply with the law and shall act at all times in a manner that promotes public confidence in the integrity and impartiality of the judiciary.
(B) A judge shall not allow family, social, political or other relationships to influence the judge’s judicial conduct or judgment.
(C) A judge shall not lend the prestige of judicial office to advance the private interests of the judge or others; nor shall a judge convey or permit others to convey the impression that they are in a special position to influence the judge. A judge shall not testify voluntarily as a character witness.
Would the NY code apply, as this is/was a federal indictment?
Is there an equivalent Federal code or rule?
My mistake. I thought this was a state case. I am sure there is a similar federal code but I am on the road now. I will get the citation later today.
Ah. Thank you. I was wondering if I was missing something.
No I was missing something. I conflated the Stormy case with the mayor’s case. Here is the link to the federal judicial code. See canon #2. dj
https://www.uscourts.gov/administration-policies/judiciary-policies/ethics-policies/code-conduct-united-states-judges#b
Quote from Andrew Cuomo (a Democrat). “If his name was not Donald Trump and if he wasn’t running for president … I’m the former AG of in New York, [and] I’m telling you that case would’ve never been brought.”. Lawfare is a big problem.
My recollection is that he was referring to the Stormy Case. And I agree with Cuomo on that assessment.
In recent years at least 30 other individuals were prosecuted under the statute. The Trump prosecution is nowhere near the requirements for a selective prosecution claim. He was convicted by a properly selected jury. He committed the crimes.
“But it was never going to be me.” Boy, that’s right up there with, “You can’t handle the truth!” and, “Nuts!” Thanks for posting this admirable missive. (UC PhD, 1998)
Hagan Scotten comes across as a thoughtful, principled, and highly decent public servant. I hope the next chapters in his life bring him joy, satisfaction, and professional success.
Can I offer a different perspective?
Prosecutors drop charges every day in return for cooperation to achieve a more important law enforcement objective. People will inform, wear wires, and agree to testify in return for having charges dropped.
In this case, the more important law enforcement objective is getting thousands of criminal illegal aliens off the streets of New York and deported back to their home countries. By law, New York City is supposed to cooperate with the federal authorities in enforcing immigration laws. In practice, the officials who run the blue zones do not cooperate.
Eric Adams, a Democrat, is not a natural ally of Trump. There was speculation when he was charged that the charges were politically motivated because he criticized Biden’s open border policy. However, both Adams and Trump want to see immigration laws enforced.
I think this is arguably a case of charges being dropped to achieve a more important law enforcement objective.
Bogus. The charges aren’t being dropped. They can be ressurecteed if Donold feels like it. Adams cooperates and maybe he’ll skate. But if he doesn’t toe the line…
You don’t get better examples of rank corruption.
“Prosecutors drop charges every day in return for cooperation to achieve a more important law enforcement objective.” The cooperation sought here is not related to the charges and is instead seeking an unrelated policy goal. That is not normal prosecutorial practice in the US.
Trump ran on deporting illegal immigrants, and especially criminals who came here with no vetting.
It makes perfect sense for him to prioritize cooperation on immigration enforcement over small ball stuff like accepting gifts from Turkey.
So what if the charges can be brought again? If you make a deal with the DA and you don’t follow through, you will get charged.
All Adams needs to do is to cooperate with federal law enforcement. This should be a pretty low bar to clear.
You obviously are not familiar with the 10th Amendment, especially the part that prevents the federal government from “commandeering” state officials to carry out federal law. I’m sure Trump has a workaround though…the Amendments were made to be broken.
The 10th Amendment reads “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people”. I don’t see the word “commondeer” in that language. However, allowing ICE staff to operate at Riker’s island is hardly commondeering (by any definition). The following is a quote from Eric Adams
“Today, I met with ‘Border Czar’ Tom Homan and local federal law enforcement officials to discuss how we can work together to remove violent migrant gangs from our city. We are now working on implementing an executive order that will reestablish the ability for ICE agents to operate on Rikers Island — as was the case for 20 years — but now, instead, ICE agents would specifically be focused on assisting the correctional intelligence bureau in their criminal investigations, in particular those focused on violent criminals and gangs. We also discussed ways to embed more NYPD detectives into federal task forces, focusing on these violent gangs and criminal activity. Keeping the 8.3 million New Yorkers who call our city home safe is — and will always remain — our administration’s North Star.”
Mr. Youell is right that anti-comandeering does not apply here. The judicial doctrine, grounded in the 10th Amendment, limits the ability of the federal government to compel state (and local) government conduct. Adams is not the City of New York.