Mayor Adams’ proposal to access public campaign funds is rejected once more.

In a recent ruling, a federal judge in Brooklyn has reaffirmed the New York City Campaign Finance Board’s decision to deny Mayor Eric Adams over million in public matching campaign funds. Judge Nicholas Garaufis rejected Adams’ legal challenge for the second time, asserting that the board’s ineligibility determination was grounded in rational assessment and adhered to constitutional standards.

The Campaign Finance Board initially denied the funding in December 2024, citing Adams’ corruption indictment as the primary reason. The indictment alleged that his re-election campaign utilized illegal contributions to qualify for matching public funds. Following the dismissal of the case, the board maintained its stance, asserting that it had sufficient grounds to believe that the mayor violated campaign finance laws and had failed to comply with requests for pertinent records.

Frederick Schaffer, chairman of the Campaign Finance Board, emphasized the board’s commitment to equity and accountability regarding taxpayer dollars, highlighting that the ruling validates the independent determination made by the board about the mayor’s campaign eligibility.

Despite recently announcing his withdrawal from the mayoral race, Adams indicated that he still intends to pursue the matching funds legally. He cited the board’s decision as a significant factor in his departure from the electoral contest, suggesting that the denial of public funds severely hampered his ability to mount a competitive campaign.

Following several months of legal disputes, Adams has been engaged in a court battle against the Campaign Finance Board’s findings since May. The board’s investigations continue alongside the backdrop of previous federal scrutiny, which concluded without pursuing charges against him due to political considerations rather than substantive legal grounds.

Under New York City’s campaign finance regulations, mayoral candidates can receive matching funds for donations made by New Yorkers, with taxpayer contributions matched at an 8-to-1 ratio for amounts up to 0.

As the situation unfolds, the implications of the rulings may carry significant weight not only for Adams but also for the broader landscape of campaign financing in New York City. A spokesperson for the mayor has not provided any immediate comments regarding this recent development.

Media News Source reports that the ongoing legal challenges and the board’s investigations reflect a complex intersection of politics and accountability within the city’s electoral framework.