By request!
Washington Times: Judge’s move opens door to appeal of decision ordering dismissal of Flynn case
A federal judge late Wednesday halted all proceedings in the case against President Trump’s first national security adviser Michael Flynn.
U.S. District Judge Emmett Sullivan issued a one-page order hours after a federal appeals court ordered him to dismiss the case saying he overstepped his authority by keeping it alive.
The move buys Judge Sullivan some time while he decides whether to appeal the 2-1 decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. Judge Sullivan could appeal the case to the en banc appellate court or the U.S. Supreme Court.
It is also possible one of the appellate court judges could request en banc hearing even if Judge Sullivan doesn’t.
“In light of the Opinion and Order issued by the Court of Appeals on Mr. Flynn’s petition for writ of mandamus, the deadlines and hearing date set forth in the Minute Order of May 19, 2020 are hereby stayed,” Judge Sullivan wrote in the order.
Dorothy A. Winsor
He refused to dismiss the case! He asked for a stay and a rehearing. The man has guts.
cintibud
NBC nightly news a few min ago made it sound like a done deal – “Big win for Flynn!” At the end they noted the entire court may take up the appeal
Lord Fartdaddy (Formerly, Mumphrey, Smedley Darlington Mingobat, et al.)
If nothing else, can he just fart around for the next six months until we get an honest, competent Justice Department?
cintibud
@Dorothy A. Winsor: He did? That just happen or was NBC sleeping?
ETA – could be both, you know
WaterGirl
@Dorothy A. Winsor: Do you have a link? I’d like to add a bit more to the thread.
Anne Laurie has a post scheduled for 8pm, so I figured if we were going to have this thread, we had better have it now so as not to step on Anne Laurie.
chopper
an en banc rehearing is going to go down in a much different manner than this piece of shit ruling.
cain
Of course there will be cries of activist judges! Never mind that we have an activist DOJ. Flynn was convicted of Treason! Dismissing the case is reckless attack on the rule of law.
chopper
i mean, any active judge on the dc circuit can ask that a decision be reheard en banc, right? so if it wasn’t sullivan, i’m sure someone else on the court would have noticed how bad the decision was stinking up the joint and made the call.
Betty
Praying that the rule of law will prevail!
WaterGirl
@Dorothy A. Winsor: I am not seeing anything on the washington post or finding anything with google.
Are we sure this isn’t old news from earlier in June
I found one article from the Washington Times from 10 minutes ago, and added a link up top.
Dorothy A. Winsor
@WaterGirl:
I’m looking but I have a writer group meeting in 5 minutes. I saw it on twitter.
Mousebumples
https://twitter.com/glennkirschner2/status/1275802281338908678?s=19
Kirk Spencer
@cain: since in this case it matters, no, not treason. False statements.
Though judge Sullivan did note he thought the prosecution could have pursued treason charges. It just didn’t happen.
Baud
I see nothing.
CaseyL
Hats off to Judge Sullivan, and I hope he has personal security.
WaterGirl
@Baud: I added what I found up top.
Baud
@WaterGirl:
Thanks.
Dorothy A. Winsor
I saw it on Publius.
WaterGirl
@Baud: Hopefully you can tells us what it means.
hueyplong
Don’t know about DC Cir, but in some other places, asking for a rehearing en banc doesn’t necessarily mean getting a hearing en banc. That said, I’m hopeful that this case will in fact be heard en banc.
Trump got absurdly lucky getting the particular 3-person panel that handed down today’s decision, most definitely in getting the decision’s author. Had it been most any other group of 3, we’d probably be happier right now.
If nothing else, this will piss off President Internet Troll for a tweeting cycle. That’s important to those of us who are actively rooting for additional stress to stroke him out or at least accelerate his cognitive decline.
WaterGirl
@Dorothy A. Winsor:
Baud
He’s probably just giving time for the full DC circuit to decide whether to hear the case.
hueyplong
@Baud: That’s one way to read “suggesting he’ll file,” but I’m not willing to go there yet. He may be conferring with the retired judge who’s assisting him instead of simply signaling, “Hey, folks, take this on your own initiative.”
oatler.
@Baud:
Schultz!
patrick II
Hannity interviewed that “great general” Michael Flynn today:
Flynn: What makes America special is Rule of Law… and today a bright light was shown on our justice system.
I’m pretty sure he believes it.
Kay
Uh oh:
Perhaps. Saying it out loud now and from the top.
Yutsano
@Kay: A different tone? Is that a joke Senator? He only does one tone, and that’s the one that ignites his base. That’s it. He’s only interested in the people who claim to adore him. You got a narcissist at the head of your party. You’re just lucky you’re from South Dakota. Otherwise you might be in trouble here too.
WaterGirl
@Yutsano: Trump has backed himself into a corner. If he changes his tune/tone, his current base will think he sold them out.
debbie
@Dorothy A. Winsor:
I wondered if he could do anything like appeal. Hot damn!
randy khan
@Kay:
“Soft.” That’s not the word I would use for being behind by 18 points.
sanjeevs
The House should pass a bill to force the admin on this.
Let the R’s go on record.
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/cornyn-joins-cruz-calls-on-trump-admin-to-continue-supporting-covid-testing-sites
debbie
@cain:
Barr’s not an activist AG. He’s pimped himself out as Trump’s latest fixer.
debbie
@Kay:
When you’ve lost Thune…
lollipopguild
@Kay: Why yes, the scorpion will change into the frog.
debbie
@WaterGirl:
From the comments:
This could be fun!
ThresherK
@Kay: Trump has a different tone? I thought if that were the case we’da seen it by now.
burnspbesq
A majority of active judges (6 of 11) must agree in order for a case to be reheard en banc.
If dreams really do come true, it will be Judge Garland who writes the opinion for the en banc court vacating the panel opinion and order, dismissing the petition, and allowing Judge Sullivan to DO HIS FUCKING JOB.
hueyplong
@debbie: Wouldn’t say Trump has “lost” Thune, who was properly reverential and mealy-mouthed. Surprising that his quotes didn’t include a “Sir.”
We’re at the point at which anything short of a Heil Trump is considered a strong criticism.
burnspbesq
@Kay:
Sure, Senator. And I’ll be dunking on LeBron anytime now.
WaterGirl
@debbie: @burnspbesq:
So say we all!
Just One More Canuck
@Yutsano: That’s senator-speak for “Please don’t be a completely racist dick in front of mikes all the time”
J R in WV
@cain:
No, he wasn’t! Without a declared state of war it’s pretty difficult to be convicted of treason, much as I hate to admit it. Read the definition of treason in the Constitution, which opposes the English definition of treason, which was whatever the King said it was.
Miss Bianca
@Kay: Oh, *now* they’re “concerned”?
HinTN
@hueyplong: Merrick Garland runs DC Appellate Court.
HumboldtBlue
Word of the day comes from the Scots: Hurkle durkle.
To be indolent
Jim, Foolish Literalist
@HumboldtBlue: that’s a verb, eh?
kindness
Flynn’s case is going to go to the Supreme Court, you all realize right? There is no way the whole DC court doesn’t rule on it and no matter which way that goes, it will reach the Supreme Ct. Now which way Roberts will go there….I can’t say but I bet it turns on him.
randy khan
@kindness:
If it is going to the Supreme Court, it’s going to take a while. If it takes more than, oh, 7 months, there could be time for a Biden Justice Department to reconsider.
burnspbesq
@HinTN:
Not clear what you mean by “runs,” but Sri Srinivasan is currently the Chief Judge of the D.C. Circuit.
NCSteve
People, forgive me for my pedantry, but journalists calling it an “appeal” is like nails on a chalkboard to the legal mind.
An appeal is a right. When you have a right of appeal, it means that the court has to hear it. There is no right of appeal here. Rather, he has the right to petition to whole court to rehear the case en banc (i.e. reheard by all of the active judges of the court rather than just three). The Court only has to hear it if a majority want to.
A majority very likely will, because seven are Democratic appointees, while only five are Republicans (but four of the five were Trump appointees while the other is the GWB appointee who joined Rao in this assault on the rule of law and separation of powers), but they don’t have to.
And that, in a nutshell, is the difference between an “appeal” and a “petition.” An appeal is a matter of right, rehearing en banc is not.