So while I am neither shocked nor outraged that the Trump administration made the decision to drop the prosecution of Adams for what are obviously Machiavellian reasons, I have to say I admire Danielle Sassoon's decision to resign rather than drop the charges against Adams. 

A lot of my MAGA friends think she is just part of the #resistance, standing in the way of Trump's lawful orders and quitting in a huff, but I don't see it that way at all. 

Instead, I see a charmingly idealistic lawyer doing what so many others should have done when they were weaponized against Donald Trump over the past few years. Sassoon, unlike them, chose to follow her conscience and refused to do what she believed was wrong. 

And she has a case that what she was ordered to do was wrong. Make no mistake about it. The order she was given made clear that one of, perhaps THE primary reason for dropping the charges, was Adams' commitment to help execute Trump's policy of expeditiously deporting illegal immigrants. 

In other words, there was a quid pro quo. 

Quid pro quos are a dime a dozen in politics and distressingly common in our legal system. Most plea bargains are based on some sort of quid pro quo. Giving immunity to a little fish to get a bigger fish is a quid pro quo. Prosecutorial discretion is most often based on an implied or explicit quid pro quo. It is an ugly reality of life. 

So in a way, Sassoon could be described as a bit naive in objecting. 

On the other hand, you could argue that Trump was handed a weapon by the Biden administration to use against Adams, and the Trump administration used it to force Adams to do what he otherwise would not have. In other words, Trump weaponized the Justice system to get what he wants. 

Nice freedom you have there. It's a shame if you were to lose it...

Sassoon's letter spells that out:

First, Mr. Bove proposes dismissing the charges against Adams in return for his assistance
in enforcing the federal immigration laws, analogizing to the prisoner exchange in which the
United States freed notorious Russian arms dealer Victor Bout in return for an American prisoner
in Russia. Such an exchange with Adams violates commonsense beliefs in the equal administration
of justice, the Justice Manual, and the Rules of Professional Conduct. The “commitment to the
rule of law is nowhere more profoundly manifest” than in criminal justice. Cheney v. United States
Dist. Ct., 542 U.S. 367, 384 (2004) (alterations and citation omitted). Impartial enforcement of the
law is the bedrock of federal prosecutions. See Robert H. Jackson, The Federal Prosecutor, 24 J.
Am. Jud. Soc’y 18 (1940). As the Justice Manual has long recognized, “the rule of law depends
upon the evenhanded administration of justice. The legal judgments of the Department of Justice
must be impartial and insulated from political influence.” JM § 1-8.100. But Adams has argued in
substance—and Mr. Bove appears prepared to concede—that Adams should receive leniency for
federal crimes solely because he occupies an important public position and can use that position
to assist in the Administration’s policy priorities.
Federal prosecutors may not consider a potential defendant’s “political associations,
activities, or beliefs.” Id. § 9-27.260; see also Wayte v. United States, 470 U.S. 598, 608 (1985)
(politically motivated prosecutions violate the Constitution). If a criminal prosecution cannot be
used to punish political activity, it likewise cannot be used to induce or coerce such activity

That is a very compelling argument. 

Obviously, it would be worse if Trump had initiated the investigation in order to get these results, as I am quite certain Biden did to punish Adams for criticizing him on immigration, but the point stands. 

Of course, just because I think Sassoon was right to resign doesn't mean that the Trump administration wasn't right to dismiss the case. Such decisions are made every day, hundreds of times a day, in big and small ways. Every act of prosecutorial discretion--to charge or not to charge- is a judgment call. 

Trump decided enforcing immigration law was of far greater national significance than prosecuting a Mayor for getting upgrades to business class. I think he is right, even if it means letting sketchy stuff get by. 

Sassoon's reasoning makes perfect sense from her point of view, and since she didn't get her way, resignation was the proper thing to do. I wish a few lawyers in Biden's Justice Department had stood up for their principles, but far too few of them appear to have had any principles at all. 

For a different take, read friend of the blog Bill Shipley, Shipwreckedcrew, an actual lawyer's take. Bill was a federal prosecutor, so you should take his opinion more seriously than mine on the legal issues.