Attorney General Bondi has promised a “new DOJ,” and swaths of the Department of Justice’s alumni are not happy with the fresh dispensation — including an erstwhile special counsel, Jack Smith. 

The signature of Mr. Smith on an open letter to Ms. Bondi and other federal prosecutors suggests that the prosecutor handpicked by Ms. Bondi’s predecessor is disinclined to disappear after the dismissal of his two cases against President Trump. 

The letter, organized by a group called Justice Connection, bears the signatures of 900 former prosecutors who assert that the values they hold dear “have been tested by recent actions of the Department’s leadership.” It declares that “some of you have been ordered to make charging decisions based expressly on considerations other than the facts and the law.”

The missive adds that “generations of former federal prosecutors are watching with pride and admiration and stand ready to support you in this honorable pursuit.” The note allows that “several of you have resigned, and others are wondering what will happen to the Department we served and revere.” 

The former prosecutors contend that the ones still serving “have responded to ethical challenges of a type no public servant should ever be forced to confront with principle and conviction, in the finest traditions of the Department of Justice.” The signatories cite the need for federal prosecutors to “exercise their tremendous power fairly, without regard to partisan politics, and in furtherance of the rule of law.”

Justice Connection is a new group that vows to “stand up for DOJ employees and combat the pernicious ‘deep state’ narrative in Congress, and in the public square.” It hopes to “build a network of DOJ alumni who will provide employees with practical support,” and promises to “fight against the lies by telling the truth.” Justice Connection is led by a longtime federal litigator, Stacey Young. 

Ms. Young stepped down after Mr. Trump took office. She tells the New York Times that the “animus coming from the administration is unprecedented and terrifying,” and that “D.O.J. employees are sitting ducks, and many well-meaning people are calling on them to just keep sitting. That’s not going to work. If they’re going to stay, they’re going to need help.”

The letter that bears Mr. Smith’s John Hancock comes amid a revolt roiling the DOJ in the wake of the order to an acting United States attorney, Danielle Sassoon, from the acting deputy attorney general, Emil Bove, to dismiss the criminal bribery charges against Mayor Adams. That command precipitated the resignations of some seven senior prosecutors, including Ms. Sassoon and the attorney leading the case, Hagan Scotten. 

Ms. Sassoon alleges a quid pro quo between the Trump administration and Mr. Adams, whereby the DOJ would drop the charges against New York City’s 110th mayor in exchange for cooperation from Gracie Hall on immigration policy. Mr. Adams denies the existence of such an arrangement. 

Judge Dale Ho, whose approval would be required to grant the motion to dismiss, ventured during a hearing on Wednesday: “To exercise my discretion properly, I am not going to shoot from my hip right here on the bench. I want to make sure I consider everything appropriate” in respect of what he called a “complicated situation.”

Judge Ho underscored that Mr. Adams retains the presumption of innocence. Mr. Bove contended, “I don’t concede that, even if there was a quid pro quo, that there would be an issue with this motion.” He has asserted that the case “restricted Mayor Adams’ ability to devote full attention and resources to the illegal immigration and violent crime that escalated under the policies of the prior Administration.”

One of the signature acts of the last administration was the appointment by Attorney General Garland of Mr. Smith as special counsel to prosecute the election interference and classified documents cases against Mr. Trump. Those cases, though, came to an end when Mr. Trump defeated Vice President Harris in November’s election and the DOJ determined that there is a “categorical” ban on prosecuting sitting presidents. 

Even after his cases were over, Mr. Smith was unbowed in his assessment of their potency. In his final report on the prosecution relating to January 6, he affirmed his confidence in the “merits” of his case and insisted, “To all who know me well, the claim from Mr. Trump that my decisions as a prosecutor were influenced or directed by the Biden administration or other political actors is, in a word, laughable.” 

Next to Mr. Smith’s name on the letter is the roster of positions he has held at the DOJ. These comprise stints as an assistant United States attorney at the Eastern District of New York, an acting United States attorney in Tennessee, and his tenure as special counsel.

None of those posts, though, required confirmation by the Senate, a gap on his resume that was set into sharp relief when Judge Aileen Cannon of South Florida ruled that he was unlawfully appointed by Mr. Garland. Judge Cannon’s ruling remains law in the Southern District of Florida, as Mr. Smith’s appeal to the 11th United States Appeals Circuit was dismissed by Mr. Trump’s Justice Department.

____________  

Correction: Judge Cannon’s ruling remains law in the Southern District of Florida. An earlier version misstated the judge’s name.