Money Vance must refuse

From the unfamiliar position of defense, Manhattan District Attorney Cy Vance answers pressing concerns about his handling of cases tied to campaign donors with a welcome hint that he’ll reconsider his ways. He’d better. As Vance runs unopposed for election to term three with close to $1 million in the bank, his years of racking up contributions from defense attorneys by the tens of thousands of dollars at a time results in the noxious perception that justice can come more easily to the super-wealthy.

Case one: the ruling Trump family, under probe in Vance’s first term for possibly fraudulent sales at the Trump SoHo tower. Donald Trump’s personal attorney Marc Kasowitz at first attempted to give $25,000, only to have the money returned, via vetting through which the DA rejects contributions from those his office is at that time investigating or prosecuting, and their lawyers.

After meeting with Kasowitz, Vance dropped the Trump case — and less than six months later accepted more than twice the initial sum from Kasowitz and other donors he brought in.

Case two: The inquiry into a young woman’s report she was groped by media mogul Harvey Weinstein, whose lawyer — a longtime donor — gave $1,000 barely a year after Vance closed the case.

Vance says contributions didn’t influence his office’s decisions not to prosecute, and no evidence contradicts his word. Even so: the Manhattan DA holds power over the fates of many, both the wealthy and powerful and those not lucky enough to be either.

Two steps will help eliminate the perception that defense attorneys can buy their way into favor.

One: set a good and long time to elapse, say a full four-year term, before accepting cash from attorneys previously barred from giving.

Two: take a page from the city’s strict campaign finance limits for lobbyists and limit donations from defense attorneys to just a few hundred dollars each.