A Manhattan federal judge has dismissed New York City Mayor Eric Adams‘s criminal corruption case with prejudice.

The “with prejudice” distinction means the case cannot be brought again, even if Adams’s relationship with President Donald Trump sours in the future. Adams had been accused of engaging in a quid pro quo with the Trump administration by complying with immigration priorities in exchange for having his case dropped.

“There may or may not be good reasons to drop this prosecution. But the reasons articulated by DOJ, if taken at face value, are inconsistent with a decision to leave the charges in the Indictment hanging like the proverbial Sword of Damocles over the Mayor,” Judge Dale Ho wrote in his decision.

“If dismissal is to be granted, such dismissal should be with prejudice in order to vindicate the purposes of Rule 48(a)—most importantly the protection of a defendant’s right to be free from prosecutorial harassment,” he added.

The Department of Justice had declined to pursue the prosecution but wished to dismiss the case without prejudice, which would allow it to be brought again later. However, an independent attorney appointed by Ho recommended it be dropped with prejudice instead last month.

The decision will prevent the federal government from enforcing consequences for Adams via his corruption case if the mayor does not comply with the Trump administration’s immigration priorities.

Ho noted that the court cannot appoint an independent prosecutor or force the DOJ to prosecute Adams, despite suggesting that the DOJ’s claim that “appearances of impropriety” taint the case is “unsupported by any objective evidence.”

He added that he found no evidence of improper motives in the Southern District of New York attorney’s office, which saw top prosecutor Danielle Sassoon resign when she was compelled to try to drop the case by the DOJ.

“The record before the Court indicates that the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of New York prosecutors who worked on this case followed all appropriate Justice Department guidelines. There is no evidence—zero—that they had any improper motives,” he wrote.

The judge suggested that the relationship between the DOJ and Adams in the case warrants scrutiny. Ho said Adams’s action to allow ICE to operate at the Rikers Island Jail Complex, “an act that appears to be contrary to New York City law,” was seemingly coerced by the new administration.

“Everything here smacks of a bargain: dismissal of the Indictment in exchange for immigration policy concessions,” he wrote.

Ultimately, Ho wrote that his decision came down to preventing a dismissal without prejudice that could lead to the government further influencing Adams’s decisions, as well as the fact that he could not force the DOJ to prosecute the embattled NYC mayor.

HERE ARE THE LAWSUITS TARGETING TRUMP’S EXECUTIVE ORDERS

When approached by reporters following the decision, Adams declined to comment on his case. “When I get a free moment, I’ll catch you,” he said.

The Washington Examiner reached out for comment from the mayor’s office.