The Trump Trial of Danielle Sassoon — WSJ
I mentioned earlier that Trump appointees at the DoJ that corruption charges against Eric Adams be dropped for what are clearly political and corrupt reasons.
This was not a surprise.
Neither was it a surprise that numerous lawyers in the New York US Attorney’s office resigned rather than do this. (Well maybe the interim US Attorney Danielle Sassoon, she clerked for Antonin Scalia was a bit of a surprise)
What is a surprise is a Wall Street Journal editorial lauding Ms. Sassoon and lambasting Trump and his Evil Minions™.
The worst and most dishonestly right wing OP/ED page in the nation is doing the right thing.
I did not see that coming:
The resignations of prosecutors at the U.S. Attorney’s office for the Southern District of New York this week are playing in the press as typical “resistance” to Donald Trump. They’re far from that, and the real story speaks well of the prosecutors but sends a rotten message to any lawyer who might want to join the Trump Administration.
The story begins with the memo this week by acting deputy attorney general Emil Bove instructing the Southern District to drop criminal charges without prejudice against New York Mayor Eric Adams. The memo cited two grounds for dismissal: The prosecution was an example of lawfare because Mr. Adams had criticized President Biden’s immigration policies, and Mr. Trump needs Mr. Adams to help on immigration enforcement.
………
Ms. Sassoon is a member of the Federalist Society and clerked for two conservative pillars of the judiciary, Justice Antonin Scalia and Judge J. Harvie Wilkinson of the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals. She led the prosecution of crypto fraudster Sam Bankman-Fried and is a rising star in conservative legal circles.
Her memo to Ms. Bondi explained in detail that the prosecution wasn’t a case of weaponized politics and why it is improper to dismiss a case based on a quid pro quo for policy cooperation by Mr. Adams. “Because the law does not support a dismissal, and because I am confident that Adams has committed the crimes with which he is charged,” Ms. Sassoon wrote, “I cannot agree to seek a dismissal driven by improper considerations.”
If the meeting with the AG didn’t take place, Ms. Sassoon said she’d resign. This is how a public official is supposed to behave when disagreeing on policy or ethical principle. If you can’t in good conscience follow instructions, you should offer to resign so your bosses can do what they want.
………The Trump Administration is acting on its belief in the unitary executive that enforces discipline across the executive branch, and we sympathize with that goal. But one argument against the unitary executive is that there is no check on corruption. The Adams case, with its tolerance of alleged corruption, isn’t a good look to persuade judges ruling on its executive actions.
This is a monumental statement against interest.
