NYC Mayor Eric Adams should resist calls to resign

The uproar surrounding the indictment of New York City Mayor Eric Adams needs to be put in context. As most attorneys will tell you, a grand jury can indict a ham sandwich. The proceeding by its nature is one-sided with only the prosecutor in the room and no defense representation. This means that whoever testifies is not subject to cross-examination or having their credibility tested in any manner. This right to confront your accuser is at the very core of due process guaranteed by the Constitution.

The presumption of innocence is not just a convenient talking point that depends on whether you like or dislike the person asserting it. It is a foundational principle in our constitutional system, and Adams is as entitled to same constitutional rights as any of us.

Adams is not the first local elected official to face calls to step down under similar circumstances. Former Rep. George Santos initially refused to step down after fraud charges before being expelled from Congress last year. Former U.S. Sen. Bob Menendez of New Jersey also refused to step down, and did not resign until after his conviction on federal bribery charges.

Former Gov. Andrew Cuomo did choose to resign while facing intense political pressure generated by allegations of inappropriate behavior with women in his employ. His predecessor, Gov. David Paterson, rebuffed pressure to resign after accusations that his administration had tried to intervene in a domestic violence case that involved a close aide. He acceded to demands he not run for reelection, and was ultimately cleared of all charges.

By comparison, the federal charges against Adams are not as serious as those facing Menendez and Santos, let alone Cuomo and Paterson.

Calls for Adams to resign have come mainly from left-leaning critics and progressives, including several who have already announced campaigns to unseat him in next year’s mayoral election.

Whether through ambition or willful blindness, they have never given Adams credit for the progress the city has made under his watch in reducing crime, improving schools, or trying to reform onerous zoning codes to spur the construction of affordable housing.

That progress has come in the face of concerted opposition and criticism, the usual state of affairs in New York City, from those who think the 700,000-plus New Yorkers who elected him mayor made a mistake.

Adams has proclaimed his innocence, both in the courtroom and in the court of public opinion, as is his right. It is up to federal prosecutors to prove to a jury beyond a reasonable doubt the charges brought against him.

There is no doubt that the charges are serious. It is imperative that Adams keep his focus on his job running a complicated city government even as he works with his lawyers to defend himself. Given the mayor's history and experience, no one should underestimate his resolve.

Calls for him to step aside before he even has the chance to defend himself are wrong, and unfair to him and the residents of the city he leads. If the far left wants the public advocate to become mayor, let them wait until Adams' rights guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution are exhausted.

Let’s let the legal process run its course before rushing to judgment. That is the way to be fair to him, and to us.

This guest essay reflects the views of Howard Fensterman, managing partner and cofounder of Abrams Fensterman LLP, based in Lake Success, and a donor to Eric Adams.