A federal judge ruled on Tuesday that he will not dismiss a bribery charge against Eric Adams, the Mayor of New York City, affirming that the indictment laid out by prosecutors adequately outlines the alleged criminal activities.

Judge Dale E. Ho expressed in his written decision that the indictment, which was made public in September, provides sufficient details regarding alleged bribery offenses, making it impossible to dismiss the charges before the trial scheduled for April.

Adams has entered a plea of not guilty to corruption allegations that largely relate to his connections with various Turkish officials and business figures from 2015 through 2022. The indictment claims he received significant benefits in the form of travel and illicit campaign contributions from individuals aiming to manipulate his political influence.

According to the indictment, Adams is accused of leveraging his connections with these Turkish officials and business entrepreneurs, a relationship that began after he assumed the role of Brooklyn Borough President in January 2014, prior to becoming mayor in January 2022.

In his opinion, Judge Ho dismissed a motion from Adams’ defense team that sought to eliminate a bribery count. This count pertains to allegations that between the summer of 2021 and the summer of 2022, Adams accepted luxurious travel benefits at no cost or at steep discounts from a Turkish official and others, in return for exerting his influence on their behalf.

The defense contended that the language used in the indictment failed to clearly define the crime of bribery. They argued that Adams did not formally exercise the governmental authority necessary under the law.

Additionally, they stated that Adams lacked formal control over city fire officials when he was said to have pressured them to grant a temporary certificate of occupancy for the Turkish Consulate’s new building, reportedly called the Turkish House, which houses multiple Turkish diplomatic offices.

Judge Ho noted that prior bribery cases demonstrate that a public official can use their influence to affect those outside their immediate authority, and federal laws regarding bribery aim to mitigate the potential for such corrupt influence.

This ruling came shortly after President-elect Donald Trump mentioned during a press conference at his Mar-a-Lago estate in Florida that he would contemplate granting a pardon to Adams. Trump commented, “I think that he was treated pretty unfairly,” although he admitted to being unaware of the specific details of the case.

As of now, Adams’ legal team has not released a statement in response to the judge’s decision.