‘DA’ Show Will Go On

Brooklyn District Attorney Charles Hynes

. George, who is running to unseat Mr. Hynes, said that the show is entertainment, not “legitimate news,” and therefore violates state campaign finance law on in-kind contributions.

Challenger Abe George

Abe George Campaign

Under the law, noncash gifts from corporations to candidates—like donated space for an event or catering—are capped at $5,000. The legal challenge contended that airing the one-hour episodes on a major television network ahead of the September primary would far exceed that value for the Hynes campaign.

Although the judge said he would reserve his decision on a motion to dismiss the case for his written opinion, his ruling essentially ends Mr. George’s attempts to keep the show from airing Tuesday.

“We’re pleased with today’s decision and look forward to bringing viewers the compelling documentary series,” said CBS News spokeswoman

Sonya McNair.

Aaron Rubin, an attorney for Mr. George, said he would consider an appeal but wasn’t optimistic. He also called it “completely unacceptable” that when he asked for email correspondence between the district attorney’s office and CBS, he received only 15 pages about the planning and promotion of the show.

“A 20 million dollar infomercial for Joe Hynes will not fool the voters of Brooklyn from Hynes’ abysmal record,” Mr. George said in a statement. “We will be exploring our legal remedies from here.”

At the court proceeding, an executive and a senior producer for the show both denied any political motivations behind the program. “The politics to me was irrelevant,” said Susan Zirinsky a senior executive producer at CBS News division, adding the show will be shown to a national audience and CBS retained complete control of editorial content.

However, the program, which differs from other law-enforcement shows because it deals with pending cases, still faces scrutiny from some defense attorneys whose clients may be featured. At least two defense attorneys this week lodged complaints with the court ahead of Tuesday’s debut, contending the show threatens their clients’ “due process right to a fair trial.”

Officials for the Brooklyn district attorney’s office declined to comment on a series of questions about the lawyers’ allegations.

Defense attorney Gerald Shargel said a producer from the show asked him earlier this month if he’d like to appear on the show to comment on the case of his client, Argyrios Gerazounis, who pleaded not guilty last June to manslaughter and other charges in connection with a 2010 fire that killed five tenants inside an apartment building that his family owned.

In his May 15 letter to Brooklyn Supreme Court Judge Danny Chun, Mr. Shargel charged that the decision to broadcast “behind the scenes” footage of prosecutors preparing for his client’s trial was a “clear violation” of the New York Rules of Professional Conduct, which lawyers are mandated to follow.

Specifically, he wrote that the show violated a rule barring lawyers from making prejudicial public statements about criminal cases. Mr. Shargel asked the judge for an injunction preventing the broadcast of any footage relating to his client’s case.

But the motion became moot when CBS informed him that the episode about Mr. Gerazounis’s case would not be aired.

The attorney for another defendant—who was featured on the debut episode of “Brooklyn DA” reviewed by The Wall Street Journal—also requested an injunction Thursday.

Attorney Timothy Parlatore, who is representing Joselito “Danny” Vega, a house painter accused of stealing artwork from a Long Island home, only learned that his client was appearing after a friend sent him a promotional video this week.

In different segments of the debut episode, prosecutor Lawrence Oh and his supervisor, Michael Vecchione, both call Mr. Vega a “thief.”

Mr. Parlatore said the show should have presented Mr. Vega’s side. Mr. Vega was indicted on a charge of money laundering on May 6 and pleaded not guilty at an arraignment Thursday.

“They’re actively putting out a reality TV show that will be edited and slanted to make my client look guilty but here in this case there’s a whole other side to the story,” he said.

Mr. Parlatore said he plans to subpoena CBS for all its raw footage and outtakes, saying “the show might actually end up helping me” to uncover what he described as illegal conduct by investigators.

Stephen Gillers, a professor at New York University School of Law who specializes in legal ethics, said while there is “nothing wrong” with a prosecutor detailing his office’s work on a TV program, there is a limit to what prosecutors are allowed to disseminate about still-pending cases. “They cannot directly or indirectly, on camera or not for attribution, give CBS information which once broadcast creates a substantial likelihood for an unfair trial,” he said.

Write to Sean Gardiner at sean.gardiner@wsj.com