Rebecca Ballhaus reports for the WSJ:
Alexander Acosta said he was resigning as labor secretary, amid criticism of a nonprosecution deal he struck with financier Jeffrey Epstein more than a decade ago as a U.S. attorney.
Appearing Friday morning with President Trump on the South Lawn of the White House, Mr. Acosta told reporters he was stepping down. President Trump said the secretary had called him that morning, and that it was Mr. Acosta's choice.
For background on the case, see this post from February.
At the time, I linked to posts by Paul Cassell saying that nullification of the nonprosecution agreement was one possible remedy. That may not be necessary given the other prosecution now pending against Epstein in New York. If the new case ensures that he never sees the outside of the prison wall again, rebooting the Florida case would not add any additional time.
Have you read the NPA? It isn't crystal clear that it doesn't provide Epstein with immunity from prosecution in any federal prosecution district, including the SDNY. It contains language that may support an immunity argument by Epstein. But it also has language that appears to foreclose that argument.
Also, it would appear that Epstein may have a due process, pre-indictment delay, argument. If so, what was the justification for the delay? And how was Epstein prejudiced by the delay?
Finally, although Acosta "resigned" (or was forced out as a political liability?) it still must be determined who, above Acosta, authorized the outrageous NPA?
I believe there will many other revelations regarding this case that won't please the Dems or the GOP. Finally, some bipartisanship.