The most marked resistance yet to President Trump’s remade Department of Justice is emerging from a high-profile source — a prestigious prosecutorial office, the Southern District of New York, covering the island of Manhattan. The SDNY has long prided itself on independence, but now finds itself in conflict with the constitutional authority of the president.   

So zealously does the SDNY protect its prosecutorial prerogatives that it is known among lawyers as “the Sovereign District” or even “the Mother Court,” suggesting an aspect of autonomy from the DOJ’s headquarters at Washington, known as “Main Justice.” That reputation is set only to grow with the resignation of SDNY’s acting Attorney General, Danielle Sassoon, and some five other senior prosecutors.

Friday brought news of another resignation — the lead prosecutor on the case, Hagen Scott. In an undated letter, he shared that any federal prosecutor “would know that our laws and traditions do not allow using the prosecutorial power to influence other citizens, much less elected officials.” He reckoned that anyone who thought otherwise would amount to a “coward” or a “fool.” Mr. Scott served in Iraq with the Army Special Forces and earned two bronze stars.

His superior, Ms. Sassoon, only 38, departs from one of the most prestigious legal jobs in the country — albeit one that she was only set to hold until Mr. Trump’s nominee for the permanent position, Jay Clayton, can secure confirmation by the Senate. The cause of Ms. Sassoon’s departure is the DOJ’s decision — conveyed to her as a command — to drop the criminal bribery case against Mayor Adams.

The order came, in a twist worthy of Shakespeare, from the DOJ’s  acting deputy attorney general, Emil Bove, himself a veteran of SDNY — and subsequently, of Mr. Trump’s defense team in the Stormy Daniels case. The directive to move to dismiss the charges against Hizzoner prompted Ms. Sassoon, and at least five other prosecutors, to tender their resignations. The ultimate decision to dismiss will have to come from the trial judge, Dale Ho, or one of his appellate superiors at the Second United States Appeals Circuit. 

Ms. Sassoon discloses that she reckons that Judge Ho will “conduct a searching inquiry” into the terms under which the case is dismissed. In the meantime, Mr. Bove wrote to Ms. Sassoon that her “office has no authority to contest the weaponization finding. The Justice Department will not tolerate the insubordination.”

Mr. Bove plans to commandeer the case back from the SDNY and instead direct the dismissal from Washington. He contends that Ms. Sasson “lost sight of the oath” that she took when she “started at the Department of Justice by suggesting that you retain discretion to interpret the Constitution.” 

Ms. Sassoon responded, in a letter, to Mr. Bove’s order by calling it  “inconsistent with my ability and duty to prosecute federal crimes without fear or favor and to advance good-faith arguments before the courts.” She adds that the DOJ “repeatedly urged what amounted to a quid pro quo, indicating that Adams would be in a position to assist with the Department’s enforcement priorities only if the indictment were dismissed.”

Mr. Adams’s lawyer, Alex Spiro, denies the existence of a quid pro quo and notes in a statement that  the “idea that there was a quid pro quo is a total lie. We offered nothing and the department asked nothing of us. We were asked if the case had any bearing on national security … and we truthfully answered it did.” Mr. Bove has ordered that “there shall be no further targeting of Mayor Adams or additional investigative steps.”

Ms. Sassoon’s letter to Ms. Bondi ventures that she is “baffled by the rushed and superficial process by which this decision was reached.” Mr. Bove’s missive accepting her resignation reckons that the prosecutor, a onetime clerk for Justice Antonin Scalia, is “incapable of fairly and impartially” helming the case and that she is flinching from “direct orders implementing the policy of a duly elected President.”

Ms. Sassoon, though, declares that it is “a breathtaking and dangerous precedent to reward Adams’s opportunistic and shifting commitments on immigration and other policy matters with dismissal of a criminal indictment.” The indictment issued by her office accuses the mayor of accepting bribes from Turkish nationals in exchange for political favors.

Mr. Bove eschewed any consideration of the merits of the case against Mr. Adams, instead arguing that it “improperly interfered with Mayor Adams’ campaign in the 2025 mayoral election” and has “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.” 

Ms. Sassoon also indicated to Ms. Bondi — and to the public — that the SDNY was preparing further charges against Mr. Adams, including witness tampering and destruction of evidence. A recent court filing indicated that the SDNY claimed to be uncovering “additional criminal conduct by Adams.” She also notes that the DOJ’s desire to dismiss the case “without prejudice” — meaning that it could be brought again — “creates obvious ethical problems” because the case could hang like a sword of Damocles over Hizzoner.

Past United States Attorneys for the SDNY have comprised Mayor Giuliani, Robert Morgenthau, and Nobel Laureate Elihu Root. Judges who have sat in the SDNY district include Learned Hand, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, and Attorney General Mukasey. The prosecution of Mr. Adams was initially brought by the last United States Attorney for SDNY, Damian Williams. He was appointed by President Biden.