A Judge Does What He Can: Corrupt Bargain To Hang Over Eric Adams No Longer
Manhattan federal judge Dale Ho had limited options in the Eric Adams case.
On the one hand, he could have acceded to the DOJ's wishes: dismiss the case without prejudice, but give federal prosecutors the opportunity to bring the same charges against the New York City mayor in the future.
Ho could have tried to stretch the limits of his own authority: decline to dismiss the case, and try to appoint a prosecutor to continue pursuing the charges. That would be fraught, with invite an immediate appeal, and would be unlikely to succeed.
But Ho chose a third option that allowed him to deny the Trump administration a key portion of the corrupt bargain that it sought to establish with Adams: on Wednesday he removed an easy source of leverage over the New York City mayor by dismissing the case against him with prejudice.
In doing so, Ho also strongly rebuked the DOJ's actions in the case, describing a mix of incompetence and malice. He noted that then-acting deputy attorney general Emil Bove had taken the extremely out-of-the-ordinary step of appearing alone at a hearing in the case after several Manhattan federal prosecutors resigned, while no other government attorney whose name was on filings in the case would appear in person.
The Trump DOJ's attempt to hold the threat of renewed prosecution against Adams, after moving to drop the case in February, stands as one of its most bizarre and convoluted efforts to use the federal government to throw its weigh around in never-before-tried ways — a particularly dramatic example among many other examples. It was mafia-style coercion mixed with federal policy: in exchange for having his corruption prosecution dropped, Adams would cooperate with the Trump administration on its legally questionable deportation initiatives. It would allow the federal government to reach down into local law enforcement matters, an intrusion that Ho called 'troubling.'
Because on Wednesday Ho dismissed the charges with prejudice, the DOJ will be barred from bringing the same charges against Adams, removing, at least to some extent, its leverage over him. The plan to put his case on hold through a dismissal without prejudice was a key part of what made the deal appear corrupt on a number of levels, the judge wrote.
It's 'difficult to imagine a more egregious example of the kind of prosecutorial harassment' that federal law is supposed to prevent, Ho said. 'Such an arrangement would be bad for Mayor Adams, and it would be bad for the people of New York City. And the Court cannot be complicit in it.'
Although Ho's decision removes that formal source of leverage, it's far from clear that its absence will have an effect on how Adams acts as mayor. At a press conference on Wednesday, Adams waved around a copy of FBI Director Kash Patel's book 'Government Gangsters' and urged every New Yorker to read it. Adams has not been known for subtlety during his tenure in Gracie Mansion.
Ho wrote in his order that even if he considered only what Bove told him in court and via filings, he would still have to dismiss the case with prejudice. The DOJ had claimed that the case deserved to be dismissed because the previous, Biden-appointed U.S. attorney Damian Williams had politicized the prosecution by touting it as one of his accomplishments after leaving office.
The obvious dubiousness of that argument aside, Ho decided to play along: if the DOJ were to bring the case again, would that not involve 'precisely the kind of prosecutorial harassment' barred by federal law?
'But the bottom line is that, if the request for dismissal without prejudice constitutes an effort to obtain policy concessions from the Mayor on immigration enforcement, that is all the more reason to dismiss this case permanently,' Ho wrote.
He also addressed the so-called 'policy' element of the bargain: cooperation with federal immigration authorities in the Five Boroughs. This is the first time in American history that Ho said he was aware of in which the government moved to drop charges against a public official over questions of 'public safety, national security, or immigration.'
'The breathtaking implications of DOJ's position — which were apparently well-understood by the numerous attorneys at USAO-SDNY and DOJ who resigned rather than sign this Rule 48(a) Motion — are difficult to square with the words engraved above the front entrance of the United States Supreme Court: 'Equal Justice Under Law,'' the judge concluded.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNET
38 minutes ago
- CNET
Tariffs Explained: What to Expect as Trump Confirms Increase in China Rates
As Donald Trump's wide-ranging taxes on imports face scrutiny in court, rates on steel and aluminum have been doubled. James Martin/CNET President Donald Trump's second-term economic plan can be summed up in one word: tariffs. When his barrage of import taxes went into overdrive a month ago, markets trembled and business leaders sounded alarms about the economic damage they would cause. Despite recent uncertainties, Trump has continued to barrel forward, doubling the tariffs on steel and aluminum imports, and announcing a new deal that would see the rate against China increase to 55%. That all came after Trump's plans hit their biggest roadblock yet in court, when late last month the US Court of International Trade ruled that Trump had overstepped his authority when he imposed tariffs, effectively nullifying the tariffs, after concluding that Congress has the sole authority to issue tariffs and decide other foreign trade matters, and that the International Emergency Economic Powers Act of 1977 -- which Trump has used to justify his ability to impose them -- doesn't grant the president "unlimited" authority on tariffs. The next day, an appeals court allowed the tariffs to go back into effect for the time being, while the administration calls for the Supreme Court to overturn the trade court ruling altogether. Should You Buy Now or Wait? Our Experts Weigh In on Tariffs Should You Buy Now or Wait? Our Experts Weigh In on Tariffs Click to unmute Video Player is loading. Play Video Pause Skip Backward Skip Forward Next playlist item Unmute Current Time 0:01 / Duration 9:42 Loaded : 1.04% 0:01 Stream Type LIVE Seek to live, currently behind live LIVE Remaining Time - 9:41 Share Fullscreen This is a modal window. Beginning of dialog window. Escape will cancel and close the window. Text Color White Black Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Opaque Semi-Transparent Text Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Opaque Semi-Transparent Transparent Caption Area Background Color Black White Red Green Blue Yellow Magenta Cyan Opacity Transparent Semi-Transparent Opaque Font Size 50% 75% 100% 125% 150% 175% 200% 300% 400% Text Edge Style None Raised Depressed Uniform Drop shadow Font Family Proportional Sans-Serif Monospace Sans-Serif Proportional Serif Monospace Serif Casual Script Small Caps Reset Done Close Modal Dialog End of dialog window. Close Modal Dialog This is a modal window. This modal can be closed by pressing the Escape key or activating the close button. Close Modal Dialog This is a modal window. This modal can be closed by pressing the Escape key or activating the close button. Should You Buy Now or Wait? Our Experts Weigh In on Tariffs However, things shake out in the end, the initial ruling certainly came as a relief to many, given the chaos and uncertainty that Trump's tariffs how caused thus far. For his part, Trump has recently lashed out against companies -- like Apple and Walmart -- that have reacted to the tariffs or discussed their impacts in ways he dislikes. Apple has been working to move manufacturing for the US market from China to relatively less-tariffed India, to which Trump has threatened them with a 25% penalty rate if they don't bring manufacturing to the US instead. Experts have predicted that a US-made iPhone, for example, would cost consumers about $3,500. During a recent earnings call, Walmart warned that prices would rise on things like toys, tech and food at some point in the summer, which prompted Trump to demand the chain eat the costs themselves, another unlikely scenario. Amid all this noise, you might still be wondering: What exactly are tariffs and what will they mean for me? The short answer: Expect to pay more for at least some goods and services. For the long answer, keep reading, and for more, check out CNET's price tracker for 11 popular and tariff-vulnerable products. What are tariffs? Put simply, a tariff is a tax on the cost of importing or exporting goods by a particular country. So, for example, a "60% tariff" on Chinese imports would be a 60% tax on the price of importing, say, computer components from China. Trump has been fixated on imports as the centerpiece of his economic plans, often claiming that the money collected from taxes on imported goods would help finance other parts of his agenda. The US imports $3 trillion of goods from other countries annually. The president has also, more recently, shown a particular fixation on trade deficits, claiming that the US having a trade deficit with any country means that country is ripping the US off. This is a flawed understanding of the matter, as a lot of economists have said, deficits are often a simple case of resource realities: Wealthy nations like the US buy specific things from nations that have them, while those nations might in turn not be wealthy enough to buy much of anything from the US. While Trump deployed tariffs in his first term, notably against China, he ramped up his plans more significantly for the 2024 campaign, promising 60% tariffs against China and a universal 20% tariff on all imports into the US. Now, tariffs against China are more than double that amount and a universal tariff on all exports is a reality. "Tariffs are the greatest thing ever invented," Trump said at a campaign stop in Michigan last year. At one point, he called himself "Tariff Man" in a post on Truth Social. Who pays the cost of tariffs? Trump repeatedly claimed, before and immediately after returning to the White House, that the country of origin for an imported good pays the cost of the tariffs and that Americans would not see any price increases from them. However, as economists and fact-checkers stressed, this is not the case. The companies importing the tariffed goods -- American companies or organizations in this case -- pay the higher costs. To compensate, companies can raise their prices or absorb the additional costs themselves. So, who ends up paying the price for tariffs? In the end, usually you, the consumer. For instance, a universal tariff on goods from Canada would increase Canadian lumber prices, which would have the knock-on effect of making construction and home renovations more expensive for US consumers. While it is possible for a company to absorb the costs of tariffs without increasing prices, this is not at all likely, at least for now. Speaking with CNET, Ryan Reith, vice president of International Data's worldwide mobile device tracking programs, explained that price hikes from tariffs, especially on technology and hardware, are inevitable in the short term. He estimated that the full amount imposed on imports by Trump's tariffs would be passed on to consumers, which he called the "cost pass-through." Any potential efforts for companies to absorb the new costs themselves would come in the future, once they have a better understanding of the tariffs, if at all. Which Trump tariffs have gone into effect? Following Trump's "Liberation Day" announcements on April 2, the following tariffs are in effect: A 50% tariff on all steel and aluminum imports, doubled from 25% as of June 4. A 30% tariff on all Chinese imports until the new deal touted by Trump takes effect, after which it will purportedly go up to 55%. China, being a major focus of Trump's trade agenda, this rate has had a rate notably higher than others and has steadily increased as Beijing returned fire with tariffs of its own, peaking at 145% before trade talks commenced. 25% tariffs on imports from Canada and Mexico are not covered under the 2018 USMCA trade agreement brokered during Trump's first term. The deal covers roughly half of all imports from Canada and about a third of those from Mexico, so the rest are subject to the new tariffs. Energy imports not covered by USMCA will be taxed at only 10%. A 25% tariff on all foreign-made cars and auto parts. A sweeping overall 10% tariff on all imported goods. For certain countries that Trump said were more responsible for the US trade deficit, Trump imposed what he called "reciprocal" tariffs that exceed the 10% level: 20% for the 27 nations that make up the European Union, 26% for India, 24% for Japan and so on. These were meant to take effect on April 9 but were delayed by 90 days due to historic stock market volatility, which makes the new effective date July 8. Trump's claim that these reciprocal tariffs are based on high tariffs imposed against the US by the targeted countries has drawn intense pushback from experts and economists, who have argued that some of these numbers are false or potentially inflated. For example, the above chart says a 39% tariff from the EU, despite its average tariff for US goods being around 3%. Some of the tariffs are against places that are not countries but tiny territories of other nations. The Heard and McDonald Islands, for example, are uninhabited. We'll dig into the confusion around these calculations below. Notably, that minimum 10% tariff will not be on top of those steel, aluminum and auto tariffs. Canada and Mexico were also spared from the 10% minimum additional tariff imposed on all countries the US trades with. On April 11, the administration said smartphones, laptops and other consumer electronics, along with flat panel displays, memory chips and semiconductors, were exempt from reciprocal tariffs. But it wasn't clear whether that would remain the case or whether such products might face different fees later. How were the Trump reciprocal tariffs calculated? The numbers released by the Trump administration for its barrage of "reciprocal" tariffs led to widespread confusion among experts. Trump's own claim that these new rates were derived by halving the tariffs already imposed against the US by certain countries was widely disputed, with critics noting that some of the numbers listed for certain countries were much higher than the actual rates and some countries had tariff rates listed despite not specifically having tariffs against the US at all. In a post to X that spread fast across social media, finance journalist James Surowiecki said that the new reciprocal rates appeared to have been reached by taking the trade deficit the US has with each country and dividing it by the amount the country exports to the US. This, he explained, consistently produced the reciprocal tariff percentages revealed by the White House across the board. "What extraordinary nonsense this is," Surowiecki wrote about the finding. The White House later attempted to debunk this idea, releasing what it claimed was the real formula, though it was quickly determined that this formula was arguably just a more complex version of the one Surowiecki deduced. What will the Trump tariffs do to prices? In short: Prices are almost certainly going up, if not now, then eventually. That is, if the products even make it to US shelves at all, as some tariffs will simply be too high for companies to bother dealing with. While the effects of a lot of tariffs might not be felt straight away, some potential real-world examples have already emerged. Microsoft has increased prices across the board for its Xbox gaming brand, with its flagship Xbox Series X console jumping 20% from $500 to $600. Elsewhere, Kent International, one of the main suppliers of bicycles to Walmart, announced that it would be stopping imports from China, which account for 90% of its stock. Speaking about Trump's tariff plans just before they were announced, White House trade adviser Peter Navarro said that they would generate $6 trillion in revenue over the next decade. Given that tariffs are most often paid by consumers, CNN characterized this as potentially "the largest tax hike in US history." New estimates from the Yale Budget Lab, cited by Axios, predict that Trump's new tariffs will cause a 2.3% increase in inflation throughout 2025. This translates to about a $3,800 increase in expenses for the average American household. Reith, the IDC analyst, told CNET that Chinese-based tech companies, like PC makers Acer, Asus and Lenovo, have "100% exposure" to these import taxes as they currently stand, with products like phones and computers the most likely to take a hit. He also said that the companies best positioned to weather the tariff impacts are those that have moved some of their operations out of China to places like India, Thailand and Vietnam, singling out the likes of Apple, Dell and HP. Samsung, based in South Korea, is also likely to avoid the full force of Trump's tariffs. In an effort to minimize its tariff vulnerability, Apple has begun to move the production of goods for the US market from China to India. Will tariffs impact prices immediately? In the short term -- the first days or weeks after a tariff takes effect -- maybe not. There are still a lot of products in the US imported pre-tariffs and on store shelves, meaning the businesses don't need a price hike to recoup import taxes. Once new products need to be brought in from overseas, that's when you'll see prices start to climb because of tariffs or you'll see them become unavailable. That uncertainty has made consumers anxious. CNET's survey revealed that about 38% of shoppers feel pressured to make certain purchases before tariffs make them more expensive. About 10% say they have already made certain purchases in hopes of getting them in before the price hikes, while 27% said they have delayed purchases for products that cost more than $500. Generally, this worry is the most acute concerning smartphones, laptops and home appliances. Mark Cuban, the billionaire businessman and Trump critic, voiced concerns about when to buy certain things in a post on Bluesky just after Trump's "Liberation Day" announcements. In it, he suggested that consumers might want to stock up on certain items before tariff inflation hits. "It's not a bad idea to go to the local Walmart or big box retailer and buy lots of consumables now," Cuban wrote. "From toothpaste to soap, anything you can find storage space for, buy before they have to replenish inventory. Even if it's made in the USA, they will jack up the price and blame it on tariffs." CNET's Money team recommends that before you make any purchase, especially a high-ticket item, be sure that the expenditure fits within your budget and your spending plans. Buying something you can't afford now because it might be less affordable later can be burdensome, to say the least. What is the goal of the White House tariff plan? The typical goal behind tariffs is to discourage consumers and businesses from buying the tariffed, foreign-sourced goods and encourage them to buy domestically produced goods instead. When implemented in the right way, tariffs are generally seen as a useful way to protect domestic industries. One of the stated intentions for Trump's tariffs is along those lines: to restore American manufacturing and production. However, the White House also claims to be having negotiations with numerous countries looking for tariff exemptions, and some officials have also floated the idea that the tariffs will help finance Trump's tax cuts. You don't have to think about those goals for too long before you realize that they're contradictory: If manufacturing moves to the US or if a bunch of countries are exempt from tariffs, then tariffs aren't actually being collected and can't be used to finance anything. This and many other points have led a lot of economists to allege that Trump's plans are misguided. In terms of returning -- or "reshoring" -- manufacturing in the US, tariffs are a better tool for protecting industries that already exist because importers can fall back on them right away. Building up the factories and plants needed for this in the US could take years, leaving Americans to suffer under higher prices in the interim. That problem is worsened by the fact that the materials needed to build those factories will also be tariffed, making the costs of "reshoring" production in the US too heavy for companies to stomach. These issues, and the general instability of American economic policies under Trump, are part of why experts warn that Trump's tariffs could have the opposite effect: keeping manufacturing out of the US and leaving consumers stuck with inflated prices. Any factories that do get built in the US because of tariffs also have a high chance of being automated, canceling out a lot of job creation potential. To give you one real-world example of this: When warning customers of future price hikes, toy maker Mattel also noted that it had no plans to move manufacturing to the US. Trump has reportedly been fixated on the notion that Apple's iPhone -- the most popular smartphone in the US market -- can be manufactured entirely in the US. This has been broadly dismissed by experts, for a lot of the same reasons mentioned above, but also because an American-made iPhone could cost upward of $3,500. One report from 404 Media dubbed the idea "a pure fantasy." The overall sophistication and breadth of China's manufacturing sector have also been cited, with CEO Tim Cook stating in 2017 that the US lacks the number of tooling engineers to make its products. For more, see how tariffs might raise the prices of Apple products and find some expert tips for saving money.
Time Business News
an hour ago
- Time Business News
Watch Political News On-Demand & Real-Time Election Coverage
In the ever-evolving world of politics, staying informed is essential—not just for voters, but for students, analysts, and every concerned citizen. That's where comes in: a next-generation political reporting platform offering video-on-demand political content, real-time updates, and sharp insights into domestic and global events. Tired of biased headlines and clickbait journalism? delivers reliable breaking political news with an emphasis on factual reporting and balanced perspectives. Whether you're tracking a presidential campaign, legislative reform, or international diplomacy, this platform provides the clarity and depth you need. Get real-time updates and watch political news videos anytime, from any device—thanks to a streamlined and responsive video-on-demand (VOD) system. One of the platform's standout features is its political video content, available on-demand. With over a million followers on social platforms, the channel publishes exclusive interviews, daily briefings, and documentary-style clips—perfect for those who prefer watching over reading. High CPC Keywords Featured: Watch political commentary online Election campaign video coverage Dan Bongino FBI reform news Lily Tang Williams interview US political video updates Whether you lean conservative, libertarian, or independent, delivers curated news for audiences seeking alternatives to mainstream outlets. With consistent updates on major events like election cycles, policy shifts, SCOTUS rulings, and congressional debates, you'll always have context behind the headlines. It's a smart destination for: Students researching political science Small business owners tracking economic policies Voters preparing for local and federal elections 👉 Read their latest political commentary blog posts. covers high-interest, high-CPC topics including: US elections 2024 news Government policy changes FBI and CIA reform Second Amendment updates Free speech and censorship in media Global political conflicts These topics not only generate heavy traffic but are also critical to shaping public opinion. is more than just a website—it's a growing digital media brand with active communities on YouTube, Facebook, Instagram, and Twitter. Subscribe or follow for real-time alerts and trending video content. Start watching exclusive political videos now → Watch on If you're serious about staying informed in today's chaotic political landscape, is your go-to source for truth-driven, timely, and thought-provoking reporting. Don't just skim headlines—dive into political analysis, understand the issues, and form your own opinions based on facts, not noise. 🔗 Visit now and elevate the way you consume political news. TIME BUSINESS NEWS
New York Times
3 hours ago
- New York Times
After a Wild Day in Court, Weinstein Jurors Will Resume Deliberations
After a wild day in court in which jurors in Manhattan convicted Harvey Weinstein of a felony sex crime but were then sent home to cool off, they will return to court on Thursday to continue their deliberations. On Wednesday, the panel of seven women and five men announced a partial verdict, convicting Mr. Weinstein on a single count of criminal sexual act and acquitting him of another count of the same charge. They have so far been unable to reach a consensus on a charge of third-degree rape. With the verdict, Mr. Weinstein, once a powerful Hollywood mogul, was convicted a second time on sex crime charges in New York. The jurors were ordered by the judge overseeing the trial, Curtis Farber of New York City Criminal Court, to continue deliberating on the final charge, which centers on accusations that Mr. Weinstein attacked Jessica Mann, an aspiring actress, in a Manhattan hotel room in 2013. They were sent home early on Wednesday after their deliberations had devolved into threats and yelling, according to the jury foreman, who complained to the judge that the other jurors were unduly pressuring him. The dramatic developments this week are another chapter in the yearslong saga of Mr. Weinstein's criminal trials and civil lawsuits after investigations by The New York Times and The New Yorker found that Mr. Weinstein had mistreated women and that his company had covered it up. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
