The New York City mayor has begun formally challenging last week's bribery and fraud indictment. His arguments in Monday's motion to dismiss amount to this: SCOTUS lets me do it. A recent Supreme Court decision helps Adams by requiring a specific quid-pro-quo to prove bribery.
Sign up to get the inside scoop on today’s biggest stories in markets, tech, and business — delivered daily. Read preview Thanks for signing up! Go to newsletter preferences Thanks for signing up! Access your favorite topics in a personalized feed while you're on the go. download the app Email address Sign up By clicking “Sign Up”, you accept our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy .
You can opt-out at any time by visiting our Preferences page or by clicking "unsubscribe" at the bottom of the email. Advertisement In his first formal attack on last week's sweeping public corruption indictment, New York City Mayor Eric Adams takes aim at what his lawyer says is the weakest of the five federal charges: bribery. Adams' argument? It's not bribery if the US Supreme Court lets you do it.
In a court filing on Monday, Adams attorney Alex Spiro cites a groundbreaking June SCOTUS decision as reason enough to toss the bribery count. The decision is Snyder v. United States.
It says handing a politician a bag of money is essentially A-OK under federal law, so long as there is no specifically stated quid-pro-quo. Advertisement In Adams' case, the Turkish officials who gave him $100,000 in upgraded flights and .