Doesn’t surprise me and I did say it here the courts have their own view of things and it is not determined by what everyone on conservative talk radio or conservative television is so sure is going to happen.
And it doesn’t even mean we have a Banana Republic. When you ask a bunch of judges to make a decision they will make a decision and you may not like it.
I’m not predicting their final decision but it is very unusual for them to take a case away from a judge very unusual.
So very true, they tend to look out for each other.
And it is VERY unusual for a Judge to continue to prosecute a defendant after the prosecution drops the charges.
In fact, just about unheard of.
What’s unusual is for a judge to begin to take up the mantel of a prosecutor which is unconstitutional. The DOJ has dropped the charges. There is no longer a case to adjudicate.
How unusual is it for a Judge to invite briefs from non-parties who have no standing before the court?
Now, that’s unusual. It contravenes the Federal Rules of Evidence. It places the Judge in the position as defacto prosecutor and sole trier of fact. It enables a retired judge with no statutory presence in this case to step in and overrule a plea deal between defense and prosecutors. Worse, it invests in this judge some fictitious power as a priori adjutant and post priori jurist - positions he is logically incapable to hold. If ever a judge cried out for removal, Sullivan is it.