It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
A federal judge said late Tuesday that he would allow third parties to weigh in on Michael Flynn’s case, an unusual move delaying the court’s response to the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the criminal charges against the former national security adviser.
U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan issued a fairly lengthy order saying “at the appropriate time” he will set a schedule for interested parties — known as amicus curiae — to comment on the case.
The move will allow critics and supporters of dropping the criminal charges against Flynn to offer their opinions.
An amicus brief is usually submitted when a third party could be affected by the court’s decision, or has unique information not previously presented in the case.
It is very rare for a judge to request such motions in a criminal case.
Judge Sullivan’s brief also quoted Judge Amy Berman Jackson, who oversaw the criminal cases against other members of the Trump campaign, including Roger Stone and Paul Manafort.
“As Judge Amy Berman Jackson has observed ‘while there may be individuals with an interest in this matter, a criminal proceeding is not a free for all,’” he wrote.
originally posted by: carewemust
a reply to: Lumenari
Being lied to by the FBI doesn't make Sullivan "wrong", any more than the FISA court justices were "wrong" in approving the FISA spy applications. They were all LIED TO by Obama's FBI.
"Judge Sullivan, who denied leave to file amicus briefs when he knew third parties would have spoken favorably of Flynn, now solicits briefs critical of Flynn," independent journalist Michael Cernovich wrote on Twitter Tuesday evening. "This is a violation of the judicial oath and applicable ethical rules. We will be filing a complaint against Sullivan. ... [He] is acting as a politician, not a judge."