Requesting a disciplinary investigation into Bove, SJC Dems cite inappropriate conduct by Bove involving the dismissal of charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams
Washington, D.C. — U.S. Senator Adam Schiff (D-Calif.) joined Democratic Whip Dick Durbin (D-Ill.), Ranking Member of the Senate Judiciary Committee, and all Senate Judiciary Democrats in filing a professional misconduct complaint against Acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove with the New York State Bar.
In a letter to the Attorney Grievance Committee of the First Judicial Department in New York, which handles complaints against lawyers whose offices are in Manhattan or the Bronx, the Senators cite reported inappropriate conduct by Bove involving the dismissal of charges against New York City Mayor Eric Adams.
The Senators wrote, “We write to express our grave concern about actions taken by Emil Joseph Bove, III that may constitute serious professional misconduct under the New York State Unified Court System Rules of Professional Conduct. Since becoming Acting Deputy Attorney General for the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Mr. Bove has abused his position in numerous ways, including using the prosecutorial power of the federal government to coerce an elected state municipal officer to pursue policies to the political benefit of President Donald J. Trump. Rather than carry out an unethical order from Mr. Bove, then-Acting U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) Danielle Sassoon, a SDNY assistant U.S. attorney, and at least five career prosecutors in DOJ’s Criminal Division, including the then-acting chief of the Public Integrity Section and a deputy assistant attorney general, resigned. Due to the serious nature of Mr. Bove’s misconduct, we request that the Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Judicial Department open an investigation to determine whether Mr. Bove, who is a member of the New York State Bar, violated applicable New York State Unified Court System Rules of Professional Conduct and should be subject to disciplinary action.”
The Senators then explained, “As detailed in official Department of Justice and U.S. Attorney’s Office for the SDNY memoranda and subsequent public reporting, Mr. Bove has explicitly premised the dismissal of charges against Mayor Eric L. Adams upon the extraction of a political favor from Mayor Adams to benefit President Trump. Notably, the dismissal is inherently coercive, because it was without prejudice, therefore allowing Mr. Bove to use the threat of again charging Mayor Adams to ensure the political favor is fulfilled. There is substantial documentary proof of this misconduct, and reportedly dozens of witnesses to verify public reporting of Mr. Bove’s misconduct in this matter[.]”
The Senators concluded, “Mr. Bove’s conduct not only speaks to his fitness as a lawyer; his activities are part of a broader course of conduct by President Trump and his allies to undermine the traditional independence of Department of Justice’s investigations and prosecutions and the rule of law. When a government lawyer, particularly one entrusted with a leadership role in the nation’s foremost law enforcement agency, commits serious violations of professional conduct, such actions undermine the integrity of our justice system and erode public confidence in it. Public confidence is further eroded when such serious misconduct is met with no consequences. Therefore, we submit this letter of complaint to respectfully request that the Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Department initiate an investigation and take appropriate disciplinary proceedings pursuant to N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 1240.7.”
In addition to Schiff and Durbin, the letter is signed by U.S. Senators Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), Amy Klobuchar (D-Minn.), Chris Coons (D-Del.), Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.), Mazie Hirono (D-Hawai’i), Cory Booker (D-N.J.), Alex Padilla (D-Calif.), and Peter Welch (D-Vt.).
View the letter here.
To the Disciplinary Counsel:
We write to express our grave concern about actions taken by Emil Joseph Bove, III that may constitute serious professional misconduct under the New York State Unified Court System Rules of Professional Conduct. Since becoming Acting Deputy Attorney General for the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Mr. Bove has abused his position in numerous ways, including using the prosecutorial power of the federal government to coerce an elected state municipal officer to pursue policies to the political benefit of President Donald J. Trump. Rather than carry out an unethical order from Mr. Bove, then-Acting U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) Danielle Sassoon, a SDNY assistant U.S. attorney, and at least five career prosecutors in DOJ’s Criminal Division, including the then-acting chief of the Public Integrity Section and a deputy assistant attorney general, resigned. Due to the serious nature of Mr. Bove’s misconduct, we request that the Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Judicial Department open an investigation to determine whether Mr. Bove, who is a member of the New York State Bar, violated applicable New York State Unified Court System Rules of Professional Conduct and should be subject to disciplinary action.
As detailed in official Department of Justice and U.S. Attorney’s Office for the SDNY memoranda and subsequent public reporting, Mr. Bove has explicitly premised the dismissal of charges against Mayor Eric L. Adams upon the extraction of a political favor from Mayor Adams to benefit President Trump. Notably, the dismissal is inherently coercive, because it was without prejudice, therefore allowing Mr. Bove to use the threat of again charging Mayor Adams to ensure the political favor is fulfilled. There is substantial documentary proof of this misconduct, and reportedly dozens of witnesses to verify public reporting of Mr. Bove’s misconduct in this matter:
- On February 10, Mr. Bove directed Ms. Sassoon in a memo “to dismiss the pending charges in United States v. Adams.” He made clear that the decision was made “without assessing the strength of the evidence or the legal theories on which the case is based,” but rather premised on the nakedly partisan consideration that “the pending prosecution has unduly 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.”
- On February 12, Ms. Sassoon spelled out her concerns with Mr. Bove’s directive in a memo to Attorney General Bondi, explaining that the “reasons advanced by Mr. Bove for dismissing the indictment are not ones I can in good faith defend as in the public interest and as consistent with the principles of impartiality and fairness that guide my decisionmaking,” primarily because “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.”
- In that same memo, Ms. Sassoon noted that, after a meeting with counsel for Mayor Adams, Mr. Bove, and members of her team, Mr. Bove “admonished a member of my team who took notes and directed the collection of [the prosecutorial team’s] notes at the meeting’s conclusion.” While Ms. Sassoon did not speculate as to why Mr. Bove confiscated the notes or what he did with them, the clear implication is that Mr. Bove took those documents with the intent to hide or destroy evidence that the Department was extracting a political favor from Mayor Adams to benefit President Trump in exchange for the dismissal of the Mayor’s prosecution.
- On February 13, Mr. Bove accepted Ms. Sassoon’s resignation, claiming that she was the one choosing “to continue pursuing a politically motivated prosecution.” This explanation is facially implausible. Mr. Bove’s February 10 memorandum claimed the Department was seeking dismissal of Mayor Adams’ indictment because it was an instance of supposed “weaponization,” but offered the barest of evidence for this charge. In contrast, Ms. Sassoon’s February 12 memo is an eight-page, detailed explanation of the merits of the case against Mayor Adams that directly refutes Mr. Bove’s allegations of impropriety and discusses additional steps that could be taken to address any such concerns, such as seeking a superseding indictment before a new grand jury. Mr. Bove also retaliated against the prosecution team in the Adams case for their unwillingness to comply with the unethical order to dismiss the case by placing them on leave and referring them to the Office of the Attorney General and the Office of Professional Responsibility for investigation and possible termination.
- The express political purpose of Mr. Bove’s directive is made even clearer by the timing of Mayor Adams’s February 13 meeting with Tom Homan, President Trump’s “border czar,” and the subsequent announcement that New York City would assist U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement in carrying out the President’s immigration agenda. In a joint media appearance on February 14, Mr. Homan appeared to threaten Mayor Adams, stating, “If he doesn’t come through, I’ll be back in New York City, and we won’t be sitting on the couch—I’ll be in his office, up his butt, saying, ‘Where the hell is the agreement we came to?’”
- On February 14, Hagan Scotten, an Assistant U.S. Attorney assigned to Mayor Adams case, submitted his resignation to Mr. Bove. Mr. Scotten’s letter explained that he agreed with Ms. Sassoon’s decision to refuse Ms. Bove’s order to move to dismiss the case. Mr. Scotten described Mr. Bove’s “first justification for the motion—that [the former U.S. Attorney’s] role in the case somehow tainted a valid indictment supported by ample evidence… [as] so weak as to be transparently pretextual.” He further stated: “No system of ordered liberty can allow the Government to use the carrot of dismissing charges, or the stick of threatening to bring them again, to induce an elected official to support its policy objectives. … any assistant U.S. attorney would know that our laws and traditions do not allow using the prosecutorial power to influence other citizens, much less elected officials, in this way.”
- On February 14, Mr. Bove reportedly continued his effort to pressure Department attorneys into signing the motion to dismiss the charges against Mayor Adams, convening a group of Public Integrity Section (PIN) attorneys and demanding that they identify one person willing to sign the motion or else face termination. Mr. Bove may also have tried to induce the attorneys’ cooperation by insinuating that obeying his directive could be rewarded with a promotion. Edward Sullivan reportedly agreed to sign the motion in order to stave off the terminations of his colleagues.
The New York State Unified Court System establishes eight categories of prohibited misconduct. Mr. Bove’s directive and related actions appear to violate several of these prohibitions. Specifically:
- Mr. Bove’s effort to dismiss the charges against Mayor Adams in order to secure a political favor for President Trump implicates Rule 8.4(e)’s prohibition against implying an ability to influence improperly or upon irrelevant grounds any tribunal, legislative body, or public official, as well as Rule 8.4(d)’s prohibition against engaging in conduct that is prejudicial to the administration of justice.
- Mr. Bove’s multiple attempts to pressure Acting U.S. Attorney Sassoon and PIN prosecutors to dismiss the charges against Mayor Adams implicate Rule 8.4(a)’s prohibition against inducing other attorneys to violate or attempt to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct and Rule 8.4(h)’s prohibition against conduct that adversely reflects one’s fitness to be a lawyer.
- Mr. Bove retaliation and threats of retaliation against prosecutors who refused his directives also implicate Comment [1] to Rule 8.4, which states that lawyers are subject to discipline when they induce, request, or instruct another lawyer or agent on their behalf to violate the Rules of Professional Conduct.
- Finally, Mr. Bove’s representations in memoranda to Ms. Sassoon and in court filings and hearings that he is the one attempting to combat political weaponization of the Department of Justice while simultaneously proffering the political favor the Trump Administration has extracted from Mayor Adams implicate both Rule 8.4(b)’s prohibition against engaging in conduct involving dishonest, fraud, deceit, or misrepresentation and Rule 8.4(h)’s prohibition against engaging in any other conduct that adversely reflects on the lawyer’s fitness as a lawyer.
Mr. Bove’s conduct not only speaks to his fitness as a lawyer; his activities are part of a broader course of conduct by President Trump and his allies to undermine the traditional independence of Department of Justice’s investigations and prosecutions and the rule of law. When a government lawyer, particularly one entrusted with a leadership role in the nation’s foremost law enforcement agency, commits serious violations of professional conduct, such actions undermine the integrity of our justice system and erode public confidence in it. Public confidence is further eroded when such serious misconduct is met with no consequences. Therefore, we submit this letter of complaint to respectfully request that the Departmental Disciplinary Committee for the First Department initiate an investigation and take appropriate disciplinary proceedings pursuant to N.Y. Comp. Codes R. & Regs. tit. 22 § 1240.7.
We appreciate your prompt attention to this sensitive matter. The Committee is available for further consultation as needed.
###