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.
Yeah except that’s not exactly true. In any event, the appeals court can let Sullivan make his ultimate ruling and then hear any appeal. They aren’t eager to bypass the trial court. Will they stop Sullivan from bringing in Gleeson? Maybe.
The courts don’t look at things the way the participants do. And even though Sullivan is a jackass in this case, the appeals court will give him the benefit of every doubt.
That’s the system.