'Full-on existential crisis': Ex-federal prosecutor reveals 'fundamental problem' in DOJ’s latest move

17 February

When the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) announced federal bribery and campaign finance charges against Democratic New York City Mayor Eric Adams on September 26, 2024, Joe Biden was still president and Merrick Garland was still U.S. attorney general. And Americans didn't know if the next president would be Republican Donald Trump or Democrat Kamala Harris, a former prosecutor.

The Adams case took a shocking turn in 2025 after Trump returned to the White House and the Trump-era DOJ — which includes U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi and Acting Deputy U.S. Attorney General Emil Bove — wanted the charges dropped. Seven federal prosecutors voiced their displeasure by resigning from DOJ.

Former federal prosecutor Elie Honig, in a biting article published by New York Magazine's Intelligencer on February 27, lays out some reasons why "the Eric Adams case is now about so much more than Eric Adams." Honig is vehemently critical of the Trump-era DOJ's handling of the case, which, he argues, "has mushroomed into a full-on existential crisis for the Justice Department."

"It didn't have to be this way," Honig laments. "If Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove, a friend and former colleague of mine, had announced that, after careful examination of the evidence and law, DOJ leadership had concluded the case was too thin and needed to be dismissed: Fine. I'd disagree — the case isn't a walkover, but it's easily sufficient to proceed to a jury — and we'd have had a fulsome discussion about whether Bove was correct."

Honig continues, "Then, we all would've moved on, and DOJ would have gone back to work. Or even if Trump had pardoned Adams, the result would've been essentially the same: animated discourse about a lousy use of the pardon power, and then on with life. Instead, Bove told us quite explicitly, it's all about politics. To heck with 'without fear of favor' and 'equal justice under law' and other quaint prosecutorial bromides; the Justice Department exists to execute the president’s will, and to enforce political discipline. If you don't like it, you can leave."

The former DOJ prosecutor stresses that he isn't "reading between the lines," as Bove has acknowledged that his motives for wanting the case against Adams dropped aren't about "the strength of the evidence" but rather, Adams' "ability to devote full attention and resources to the illegal immigration and violent crime" in New York City.

"Here's the fundamental problem with what Bove and DOJ leadership have done," Honig argues. "They have enacted and embraced a policy that it's perfectly valid to base prosecution decisions on the political inclinations of the subject: Mayor Adams can't remain under indictment because he will help us promote our immigration policy agenda…. Let's take it beyond Adams."

The DOJ alumni continues, "What if a mayor in Texas had been indicted for, let's say, embezzlement — but then DOJ under Biden had ordered the case dropped because the mayor promised he’d support the administration’s sanctuary cities policy. Would Bove be OK with that outcome? The mind boggles at the implications."

Elie Honig's full article for New York Magazine is available at this link.

From Your Site Articles