(NEW YORK) — Disgraced former Rep. George Santos, R-N.Y., insists he has “accepted full responsibility” for a series of fraudulent schemes despite a “social media blitz” that federal prosecutors said suggested otherwise.
Prosecutors repeated their request for a prison term of more than seven years when Santos is sentenced Friday, saying his recent social media posts show the 35-year-old Santos “remains unrepentant for his crimes.”
Santos, in a letter to the judge Tuesday, said he can be both “profoundly sorry” and upset by the Justice Department’s recommendation of a lengthy prison sentence.
“But saying I’m sorry doesn’t require me to sit quietly while these prosecutors try to drop an anvil on my head. True remorse isn’t mute; it is aware of itself, and it speaks up when the penalty scale jumps into the absurd,” Santos’ letter said.
“Ironically, the same political ambition that underpinned my own wrongdoing now seems to fuel the government’s overreach in this case,” hew wrote. “You’d think they might have learned something from the very person they chose to prosecute so vehemently!”
Santos included a selective chart to suggest the government’s sentencing recommendation is out of step with other political prosecutions, citing former Illinois Rep. Jesse L. Jackson Jr. being sentenced to 30 months for misusing $750,000 in campaign funds or ex-New York Rep. Michael Grimm being sentenced to eight months for concealing $900,000 in wages and taxes.
Prosecutors alleged Santos, with the help of former Campaign Treasurer Nancy Marks, falsified Federal Election Commission filings, fabricating donor contributions and inflating fundraising totals to meet the $250,000 threshold required to join the National Republican Congressional Committee’s coveted “Young Guns” program. Marks pleaded guilty and is awaiting sentencing in June.
When informed he hadn’t reached the NRCC benchmark, Santos texted an associate, “We are going to do this a little differently. I got it.”
The “different” approach included submitting fake donations attributed to family members, fictitious individuals and even identities stolen from elderly supporters, according to the filing.
Santos pleaded guilty to wire fraud and aggravated identity theft in August 2024. He had already been expelled from Congress in December 2023.
(WASHINGTON) — The Trump administration’s attempt to invoke the Alien Enemies Act to deport alleged members of the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua hit another legal roadblock Tuesday with a federal judge in Colorado blocking some removals under the wartime authority.
U.S. District Judge Charlotte Sweeney issued a temporary order Tuesday that prohibits the administration from using the law to deport noncitizens currently within the state of Colorado, further requiring that noncitizens subject to the AEA removal receive at least three weeks’ notice before deportation..
The Trump administration last month touched off a legal battle when it invoked the Alien Enemies Act — an 18th century wartime authority used to remove noncitizens with little-to-no due process — to deport two planeloads of alleged migrant gang members to the CECOT mega-prison in El Salvador by arguing that the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua is a “hybrid criminal state” that is invading the United States.
An official with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement acknowledged that “many” of the men deported on March 15 lack criminal records in the United States — but said that “the lack of specific information about each individual actually highlights the risk they pose” and “demonstrates that they are terrorists with regard to whom we lack a complete profile.”
The U.S. Supreme Court, in a subsequent 5-4 decision, allowed the Trump administration to resume deportations of alleged migrant gang members under the Alien Enemies Act — but said detainees must be given due process to challenge their removal.
The Colorado case is one of several lawsuits challenging the use of the AEA in Colorado, New York, and Texas, in which lawyers have argued that the Trump administration is shortchanging noncitizens by failing to provide them the “reasonable time” promised by the Supreme Court.
Judge Sweeney, in Tuesday’s order, criticized the Trump administration for attempting to remove two men in a manner she said is “deficient and fails to comport with due process.” According to the judge, the notices used by the Trump administration did not provide the men a reasonable amount of time to act on their due process and were only provided in English.
“The Court has grave concerns that Petitioners would be afforded notice that comports with due process to challenge the determination,” she wrote.
The judge also cast doubt on the legitimacy of President Donald Trump’s proclamation invoking the use of the Alien Enemies Act, writing that the plaintiffs were likely to prove that the proclamation violates Immigration and Nationality Act and humanitarian protections.
The Colorado ruling comes as a federal judge in New York is set to hear arguments Tuesday after he temporarily ruled that detained migrants being held in the Southern District of New York could not be deported without due process.
U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein ruled earlier this month that several alleged Venezuelan gang members could not be deported under the AEA without them first receiving notice and an opportunity for a hearing.
Judge Hellerstein, in his temporary order blocking the deportations, suggested his decision was meant to define the parameters of the Supreme Court’s opinion requiring due process be granted.
The relief Hellerstein granted is limited to approximately a dozen migrants currently detained in a few New York counties.
(WASHINGTON) — Michigan is set to face a competitive primary and fierce race for the battleground state’s open U.S. Senate seat in 2026.
Three major Democrats have already entered the contest, while Republicans eye flipping the seat, which will be vacated by retiring Sen. Gary Peters, D-Mich.
The battleground state had mixed results for both parties in 2024, with President Donald Trump snagging a win in the presidential race and then-Rep. Elissa Slotkin, a Democrat, prevailing in the Senate race. Democrats hope to keep the open seat in their hands, while Republicans hope to flip it and add to their majority in the Senate.
Rep. Haley Stevens, a Democrat who represents Michigan’s 11th District, revealed on Tuesday that she will run for Senate, with an announcement focused on the state’s automobile industry and how it may be affected by tariffs imposed by the White House.
“Growing up in Michigan meant being surrounded by innovation, ingenuity and pride in hard work. And from our farmers to our nurses to our manufacturers, Michigan has the best workers in the world,” Stevens said in an announcement video posted on social media on Tuesday.
“But Donald Trump has a much different plan for Michigan,” she added.
“His chaos and reckless tariffs are putting tens of thousands of Michigan jobs at risk,” she said, adding that costs are rising “but all we’re getting is more chaos. What the heck are they doing?”
Stevens, first elected to the House in 2018, is a member of the House Education and Workforce Committee and the House Science, Space and Technology Committee. She also served as chief of staff of the Presidential Task Force on the Auto Industry during the Obama administration.
In 2022, she endured a competitive member-on-member primary against then-Rep. Andy Levin, although she was bolstered by outside support from pro-Israel groups. (The U.S.-Israel relationship is a hot-button issue in Michigan and became a wedge issue during the 2024 elections.)
She is set to face a competitive Democratic primary, which includes two other high-profile figures. (One key name took himself out of contention already: Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg ruled out a Senate bid in March.)
Abdul El-Sayed, the former director of the Wayne County, Michigan, health department and a former Michigan gubernatorial candidate, announced on Thursday he will run for the seat — and he netted a quick endorsement from Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt.
“I’m running for U.S. Senate because in the state that built the ‘American dream,’ it shouldn’t be this hard just to get by,” El-Sayed said in an announcement video that opened with a fictional, old-style cartoon talking about his background.
“We’ve got to fight back hard against Trump and [Elon] Musk with a hell of a lot more than paper paddles and broken promises. … The disease is the corruption of our politics by billionaires and corporations, while the workers who built this country are forgotten,” he added in the announcement in clips that appear to be from a podcast taping.
Sanders, who has received renewed national attention in recent months as he attracts crowds on his nationwide “Fighting Oligarchy” speaking tour, endorsed El-Sayed the same day.
Earlier in April, Michigan state Sen. Mallory McMorrow announced her own Senate bid.
In an announcement video, which opened with a montage of news clips about Trump and a clip of Musk’s viral moment in February holding a chainsaw, McMorrow said, “There are moments that will break you. This is not that moment. This moment will challenge us, test us. And if it all feels like too much? That’s they’re plan. They want to make you feel powerless. But you are not powerless.”
McMorrow entered the national spotlight after being baselessly accused of aiming to “groom and sexualize kindergartners” in a 2022 fundraising email sent out by a fellow state senator. She struck back in a now-viral floor speech, saying, “I am the biggest threat to your hollow, hateful scheme.”
In her announcement video, McMorrow framed the Trump administration as creating a fearful moment in time and said new leaders are needed — echoing a debate within the Democratic Party about whether it needs generational change at the top of the party.
“There’s a lot of fear and anger and uncertainty right now about people in power who frankly have no business being there. So you know what won’t fix it? The same old crap out of Washington,” McMorrow said, “We need new leaders because the same people in D.C. who got us into this mess are not going to be the ones to get us out of it.”
On the Republican side, the primary is still taking shape, but one major name has entered the fray.
Former Rep. Mike Rogers, who ran for Senate in Michigan in 2024 and narrowly lost to Slotkin, announced in mid-April that he would enter the race.
“The lessons I learned working on a factory floor, serving as an officer in the United States Army, and then as a federal agent protecting our communities, taking down drug dealers and gangsters — it taught me about grit and sacrifice,” Rogers said in an announcement video.
“I’ll stand with President Trump,” he added. “And we will deliver on the mandate given to him by the American people. … For me, it will always be America and Michigan first.”
Rogers also spoke about cutting costs and prices while bringing manufacturing jobs back to Michigan.
“I guarantee we’ll protect Social Security for our seniors,” Rogers added.
Notably, Rogers has received some key support from establishment Republicans — even though the primary field is not fully set. In a pair of statements released through the National Republican Senatorial Committee, the campaign arm of Senate Republicans, Senate Majority Leader John Thune, R-S.D., and Sen. Tim Scott, R-S.C., who is chairman of the NRSC, both endorsed Rogers.
(NEW YORK) — Three federal prosecutors who worked on the corruption case against New York City Mayor Eric Adams resigned Tuesday — while they were on administrative leave — instead of agreeing to “preconditions” on them returning to the office, sending a sharp letter to Deputy Attorney General Todd Blanche and accusing him of pressuring them to falsely “express regret and admit some wrongdoing” in the case.
“The Department placed each of us on administrative leave ostensibly to review our, and the Southern District of New York U.S. Attorney’s Office’s, handling of the Adams case,” the trio of prosecutors assigned to Adams’ case, Celia V. Cohen, Andrew Rohrbach and Derek Wikstrom, wrote to Blanche. “It is now clear that one of the preconditions you have placed on our returning to the Office is that we must express regret and admit some wrongdoing by the Office in connection with the refusal to move to dismiss the case. We will not confess wrongdoing when there was none.”
The three lawyers were part of a group in the Justice Department who refused to sign off on the dismissal of the bribery case against Adams in February. They were placed on administrative leave last month as an investigation played out.
“We have served under Presidents of both parties, advancing their priorities while pursuing justice without fear or favor,” the three prosecutors wrote. “The role of a career prosecutor is not to set policy. But a prosecutor must abide by the oath to uphold the Constitution and laws of the United States and the rules of professional ethics set by the bar and the courts.”
They later added, “Now, the Department has decided that obedience supersedes all else, requiring us to abdicate our legal and ethical obligations in favor of directions from Washington. That is wrong.”
The fallout from acting Deputy Attorney General Emil Bove’s request that the Southern District of New York dismiss charges without prejudice began in mid-February. Danielle Sassoon, then-acting U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, resigned from her position Feb. 13 after suggesting DOJ leadership, including Bove, were explicitly aware of a quid pro quo suggested by Adams’ attorneys, saying Adams’ vocal support of President Donald Trump’s immigration policies would be boosted by dismissing the indictment against him.
“Rather than be rewarded, Adams’s advocacy should be called out for what it is: an improper offer of immigration enforcement assistance in exchange for a dismissal of his case,” Sassoon wrote at the time. “Although Mr. Bove disclaimed any intention to exchange leniency in this case for Adams’s assistance in enforcing federal law, that is the nature of the bargain laid bare in Mr. Bove’s memo.”
Five other DOJ officials would join Sassoon in resigning from the office in protest, while at least six top Department of Justice officials refused to sign onto the case’s dismissal, sources told ABC News last month.
Adams was indicted last year in the Southern District of New York on five counts in an alleged long-standing conspiracy connected to improper benefits, illegal campaign contributions and an attempted cover-up. He had pleaded not guilty.
The dismissal paperwork was later signed by an attorney in the Justice Department’s Public Integrity Section, leaving the decision to dismiss the case to a federal judge in New York.
On April 2, Judge Dale Ho officially dismissed the case, however, he did so with prejudice, meaning the charges cannot be revived. The DOJ had asked for the charges to be dismissed without prejudice and said they could be brought against Adams again following the November mayoral election.
But three weeks later, the fallout continued with Tuesday’s letter.
The three prosecutors ended their letter to Blanche: “Serving in the Southern District of New York has been an honor. There is no greater privilege than to work for an institution whose mandate is to do the right thing, the right way, for the right reasons. We will not abandon this principle to keep our jobs. We resign.”
The U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York declined to comment.
(AUSTIN, Texas) — The measles outbreak in western Texas has now reached 624 cases, with 27 new infections confirmed over the last five days.
Nearly all of the cases are among unvaccinated individuals or among those whose vaccination status is unknown, according to new data published by the Texas Department of State Health Services (DSHS) on Tuesday.
Currently, 10 cases are among residents who have been vaccinated with one dose of the measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) vaccine, while 12 cases are among those vaccinated with two doses.
At least 64 measles patients have been hospitalized so far, according to the DSHS, with the majority of cases presenting in children and teenagers between ages 5 and 17, followed by children ages 4 and under.
Gaines County, which borders New Mexico, remains the epicenter of the outbreak, with 386 cases confirmed so far, DSHS data shows.
This is a developing story. Please check back for updates.
(WASHINGTON) — A panel of appeals judges expressed skepticism with elements of the Trump administration’s transgender service member ban, peppering a Department of Justice lawyer with questions Tuesday morning about the basis for the ban and justification for blocking anyone with gender dysphoria from service without making individualized determinations.
DOJ attorney Jason Manion attempted to justify the policy by arguing that transgender troops lessen the readiness of the U.S. military and that the policy falls under a “core area of presidential power.”
“The military has determined that this policy will increase the readiness and effectiveness of the military and, in fact, that not being able to enact it would be harmful to the military,” he argued.
Judge Cornelia Pillard, an Obama appointee, pushed back on the assertion by highlighting that the Pentagon did not provide concrete evidence or research to show that transgender members of the military are less lethal or less ready for combat.
“If the military said people with red hair are just too fragile and vulnerable, we are going to kick them all out of the military and we are going to not allow any of them ever to join — we have no evidence of that, but we think they’re a threat to military preparedness, to unit cohesion, and too costly, and so we’re just going to kick them out, is that rational enough under military deference?” she asked.
Manion attempted to argue that gender dysphoria is “marked by severe clinical distress or impaired functioning,” but Pillard noted that the military already screens soldiers for depression and suicidal ideation.
Judges Gregory Katsas and Neomi Rao, both Trump appointees who also served in his first administration, also raised concerns that the policy treats soldiers the same based on their sex, rather than allow individualized determinations.
“Should the military be required to take an individualized determination?” Rao asked. “Is the decision not to make individualized determinations some indication that this is treating people the same based on the transgender status?”
Shannon Minter, an attorney for the group of 32 transgender service members and recruits who challenged the policy, urged the court to stop the ban from taking effect, arguing the Trump administration has failed to prove why thousands of transgender soldiers deserve to be declared unfit for service.
“The government have a high burden here, and it has not been able to meet any part of it,” Minter said.
The group sued the Trump administration over the policy in January, and at least three different federal judges have since blocked the ban from taking effect.
“The Court’s opinion is long, but its premise is simple. In the self-evident truth that ‘all people are created equal, all means all. Nothing more. And certainly nothing less,” Judge Ana Reyes wrote in a ruling last month blocking the policy.
The Trump administration has asked the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit to overrule Reyes’ decision, arguing that gender dysphoria “limits deployability and imposes additional costs on the military” and is “not compatible with military readiness and lethality.”
Lawyers with the DOJ have argued that the courts should defer to military leadership about the best way to run the armed services.
“Plaintiffs offer no sound basis for concluding that the line the military has once again drawn falls outside constitutional bounds,” DOJ lawyers wrote.
But lawyers representing the transgender service members have pushed back on the Pentagon’s claim, arguing the Trump administration has provided no evidence of the harm stemming from the policy.
They argued that allowing the policy to take effect would “trigger an explosive and harmful trip wire, causing reputational, professional, and constitutional harm that can never be fully undone.”
(NEW YORK) — A federal judge in New York is set to hear arguments Tuesday after he temporarily ruled that detained migrants being held in the Southern District of New York could not be deported without due process.
U.S. District Judge Alvin Hellerstein ruled earlier this month that several alleged Venezuelan gang members could not be deported under the Alien Enemies Act without them first receiving notice and an opportunity for a hearing.
The Trump administration last month touched off a legal battle when it invoked the Alien Enemies Act — an 18th century wartime authority used to remove noncitizens with little-to-no due process — to deport two planeloads of alleged migrant gang members to the CECOT mega-prison in El Salvador by arguing that the Venezuelan gang Tren de Aragua is a “hybrid criminal state” that is invading the United States.
An official with the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement acknowledged that “many” of the men lack criminal records in the United States — but said that “the lack of specific information about each individual actually highlights the risk they pose” and “demonstrates that they are terrorists with regard to whom we lack a complete profile.”
The U.S. Supreme Court, in a 5-4 decision earlier this month, allowed the Trump administration to resume deportations of alleged migrant gang members under the Alien Enemies Act — but said detainees must be given due process to challenge their removal.
Judge Hellerstein, in his temporary order blocking the deportations, suggested his decision was meant to define the parameters of the Supreme Court’s opinion.
The relief Hellerstein granted is limited to approximately a dozen migrants currently detained in a few New York counties.
Astrid Riecken For The Washington Post via Getty Images
(WASHINGTON) — Attorneys for wrongly deported Kilmar Abrego Garcia are requesting a conference Tuesday to address what they say is the Trump administration’s “failure to comply” with a court order granting expedited discovery in the case.
U.S. District Judge Paula Xinis last week slammed Justice Department attorneys over their inaction over Abrego Garcia’s wrongful detention and ordered government officials to testify under oath through expedited discovery.
In a letter to the judge Monday night from both the government and Abrego Garcia’s attorneys, lawyers for Abrego Garcia said that the Trump administration has responded to their discovery requests by producing “nothing of substance” and providing interrogatory responses that are “non-responsive.”
Abrego Garcia’s attorneys said the administration has claimed state secrets privilege and governmental privilege “without any foundation for doing so.”
The attorneys also said they invited government officials to meet and confer several times, but the officials declined to meet until Monday evening, “on the eve of depositions.”
Department of Homeland Security Acting General Counsel Joseph Mazzara was scheduled to be deposed Tuesday morning, according to the letter.
The government, in the same letter, said they have “put forward a good-faith effort to provide appropriate responses to both Plaintiffs’ Interrogatories and Request for Production.”
Abrego Garcia, a Salvadoran native who has been living with his wife and children in Maryland, was deported in March to El Salvador’s CECOT mega-prison — despite a 2019 court order barring his deportation to that country due to fear of persecution — after the Trump administration claimed he was a member of the criminal gang MS-13.
The Trump administration, while acknowledging that Abrego Garcia was deported to El Salvador in error, has said that his alleged MS-13 affiliation makes him ineligible to return to the United States. His wife and attorney have denied that he is an MS-13 member.
Judge Xinis early this month ruled that the Trump administration must “facilitate” Abrego Garcia’s return, and the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously affirmed that ruling, “with due regard for the deference owed to the Executive Branch in the conduct of foreign affairs.”
The government, in Monday’s letter to the judge, said that any requirement for a more detailed response on the legal basis for Abrego Garcia’s confinement “would be wholly inappropriate and an invasion of diplomatic discussions.”
“Upon Abrego’s repatriation to El Salvador, his detention was no longer a matter of the United States’ confinement, but a matter belonging to the government of El Salvador — which has been explained to the Plaintiffs repeatedly,” the government said. “Their insistence on obtaining any information on ‘diplomatic discussions’ is a facially unwarranted and inappropriate intrusion into the diplomatic process — a matter which the Supreme Court specifically reserved to the Government’s province.”
In a separate filing, attorneys for Abrego Garcia included as an exhibit the government’s objections to the plaintiff’s first set of expedited interrogatories, in which the government says that “disclosing the details of any diplomatic discussions regarding Mr. Abrego Garcia at this time could negatively impact any outcome.”
In the exhibit, the government acknowledges the $6 million that has been made available to the government of El Salvador to be used for its “law enforcement needs,” including for the detention of the Venezuelan migrants that were sent to El Salvador’s CECOT mega-prison.
“The United States has not provided any specific assistance with respect to the detention of Abrego Garcia or any other Salvadoran national,” the government said.
(WASHINGTON) — Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth on Tuesday strongly denied that what he shared over a second group chat on the Signal messaging app were classified war plans about imminent U.S. airstrikes targeting Houthi militants in Yemen, and blamed former staffers for leaking, accusing them of going to the news media with new information to “sabotage” Trump’s agenda.
Hegseth and other administration officials have insisted that the information about those airstrikes that was shared earlier with another Signal group established by national security adviser Mike Waltz was not classified.
On Tuesday, Hegseth continued to make that case as questions have been raised about how he shared similar information with a smaller Signal group that sources told ABC News included his wife, brother, and personal attorney.
“I look at war plans every single day. What was shared over Signal then and now, however you characterize it, was informal unclassified coordination for media coordination other things. That’s what I’ve said from the beginning,” Hegseth said in a live interview from the Pentagon on “Fox & Friends.”
Sources familiar with the chat had earlier told ABC News that Hegseth had established the Signal group with family and friends during his Senate confirmation process. Hegseth was not asked in the interview why he had shared the information with that group of close personal advisers that included his wife, who is not a U.S. government employee.
The defense secretary also criticized former close advisers fired last week as part of what he said was leak investigation that followed news reports about military plans for the Panama Canal, Elon Musk’s planned visit to the Pentagon and other developments.
“It led to some unfortunate places, people I have known for quite some time, but it’s not my job to protect them,” said Hegseth. “It’s my job to protect national security the president of the United States and let the investigation go where it is. So, when that evidence is gathered sufficiently, and this has all happened very quickly, it will be handed over to DOJ, and those people will be prosecuted if necessary.”
The former staffers include Dan Caldwell, a longtime close adviser to Hegseth, Darin Selnick, who was the Pentagon’s deputy chief of staff, and Colin Carroll, who served as chief of staff for the deputy secretary of defense and on Tuesday Hegseth claimed, without evidence, that they were responsible for news leaks intended to “sabotage” the Trump administration’s agenda for the Pentagon.
“Those folks who are leaking, who have been pushed out of the building, are now attempting to leak and sabotage the president’s agenda and what we’re doing, and that’s unfortunate,” said Hegseth.
“So, once a leaker, always a leaker, often a leaker, and so we look for leakers, because we take it very seriously, and we will do the investigation,” said Hegseth.
At the same time, Hegseth left open the possibility that the ongoing investigation might exonerate the very people he was accusing.
“If those people are exonerated, fantastic,” said Hegseth. “We don’t think, based on what we understand, that it’s going to be a good day for a number of those individuals because of what was found in the investigation.”
On Monday, in a video interview with Tucker Carlson, Caldwell vigorously denied that he had leaked information and said he and the other two officials did not know why they had been fired.
Also on Monday, Hegseth blamed “anonymous smears” and President Donald Trump dismissed any concerns, said he has “great confidence” in Hegseth..
“Here we go again. Just a waste of time. He is doing a great job,” Trump said of Hegseth.
The recent disclosures of the new Signal group and the dismissal of top advisers have raised questions about Hegseth’s judgment among a large number of congressional Democrats who have called for Hegseth to step down from his post.
On Monday, Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska, and a former Air Force general, became the first Republican to suggest that Hegseth should be removed as defense secretary.
“If it’s true that he had another chat with his family, about the missions against the Houthis, it’s totally unacceptable,” he told Politico.
“It looks like there’s a meltdown going on,” Bacon said. “There’s a lot — a lot — of smoke coming out of the Pentagon, and I got to believe there’s some fire there somewhere.”
On Tuesday, Hegseth claimed that critics of his Pentagon agenda have “come after me from day one” but said his focus would remain on carrying out his goals at the Pentagon.
“I’m here because President Trump asked me to bring warfighting back to the Pentagon every single day,” said Hegseth.
“That is our focus, and if people don’t like it, they can come after me. No worries. I’m standing right here,” Hegseth said. “The warfighters are behind us. Our enemies know they’re on notice. Our allies know we’re behind them, and that in this dangerous world for the American people is what it’s all about.”
“No, I haven’t blinked, and I won’t blink because this job is too big and too important for the American people,” he said.
(NEW YORK) — The top federal prosecutor in Manhattan has agreed to step aside, clearing the way for President Donald Trump on Tuesday to install his nominee as interim United States attorney for the Southern District of New York, yet another shake-up for the nation’s most prominent federal prosecutor’s office
Matthew Podolsky, who has agreed to step down, took over for Danielle Sassoon, who in February resigned in protest of the Justice Department’s order to drop corruption charges against New York Mayor Eric Adams.
Sassoon had been named interim U.S. attorney by Trump when the president fired Edward Kim, who assumed the role during the change in administrations.
Trump’s nominee, Jay Clayton, will serve in an interim capacity for up to four months until confirmed by the Senate or appointed by federal judges in Manhattan. Clayton was the head of the Securities and Exchange Commission during Trump’s first term in office.
Before leading the SEC, Clayton was a partner at New York law firm Sullivan & Cromwell and worked with Wall Street firms and other corporations to navigate federal regulations.
Trump tried to install Clayton during his first term but then-U.S. Attorney Geoffrey Berman refused to resign until then-Attorney General Bill Barr agreed to replace him with a trusted deputy.
Senate Democratic leader Chuck Schumer recently signaled his intent to block Clayton’s nomination over frustration with Trump, who he said “has no fidelity to the law.”
“Donald Trump has made clear he has no fidelity to the law and intends to use the Justice Department, the U.S. Attorney offices and law enforcement as weapons to go after his perceived enemies,” Schumer said in a statement last week. “Such blatant and depraved political motivations are deeply corrosive to the rule of law and leaves me deeply skeptical of the Donald Trump’s intentions for these important positions. For that reason, I will not return the blue slip for the U.S. Attorney nominees for the Southern and Eastern Districts of New York.”
By naming Clayton as his interim choice, Trump is likely able to get his way without putting Clayton through a confirmation process.
After 120 days, judges in the Southern District of New York can vote to appoint Clayton to the job until there’s a confirmed nominee, and Trump could simply name no one else.
