It’s still pretty absurd isn’t it? I would think there would be boilerplate on judicial review included on just about any petition asking for a law to be struck down.
This is like a teacher asking a student to write an essay on something really basic because the student is a bit thick.
of course, there was boilerplate and she tried to direct him to it, but he wasn’t having any of it. he wants SPECIFICALLY the DOJ to address OBAMA’s ACTUAL COMMENTS in re authority of the fed judiciary to overturn unconsitutional laws. He was very clear about that. So it’s not regurgitating precedent. they are going to have to invent out of whole cloth, what Obams was trying to say and to square that up with actual precedent.
so this isn’t absurd at all, clearly this judge, and a number of others as well, was FROSTED at his effrontery and outright WRONGNESS, and found a way to call someone to account for it. Because the case in question had some toenail nexus to ACA, he could do it here.
and the boilerplate on judicial review is one of the very first sections of EVERY court of appeals brief, not just ones asking for laws to be struck. the circuit court rules routinely require you to outline what the standard of review is for the case in question.