This isn't a lawsuit, yet. Broden is asking Petersen, who otherwise sits in charge of and decides the Examining Trial for Clendennen (which aims to answer, "does probable cause exist to arrest Clendennen?"), to recuse himself.
Petersen can, of course, deny the motion. He has that power, no question. At which time Broden can appeal.
All that drags out the time to get Clendennen his Examining Trial, but the price is to put Petersen on the spot for Petersen's official actions.
Examining Trials become moot if the Grand Jury returns either an indictment or a no-bill, which is a way for Petersen to sort of take the heat off. But this action, publicly suggesting the Texas AG to undertake a criminal investigation against Petersen, is outside of the "Examining Trial / no bill" loop; and also puts some pressure on the Texas AG.
You are of course correct, it’s a motion, not a lawsuit.
But my basic point stands...there’s so much fertile ground here for procedural actions against the judicial misconduct that has already happened and for civil rights lawsuits on pretty much everything else, it’s going to one long, never ending avalanche of paper on the entire Waco judicial and police establishment.
You may disagree....but from my perspective, comparing to virtually any jurisdiction in the rest of the West, this one is extreme.
Nine men dead, and hundreds arrested. Short of um...Waco!...I can’t think of a similar event. Maybe the Vegas Hells Angels bust, which probably had more going for it.
“All that drags out the time to get Clendennen his Examining Trial, “
If the GJ indictment comes down first, the examining trial is cancelled.