Appeals Court Asks Whether Flynn Judge Should Recuse Himself, Order Indicates

[Right_in_Virginia]

Appeals Court Asks Whether Flynn Judge Should Recuse Himself, Order Indicates
Epoch Times, Aug 5, 2020

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit has ordered former Trump adviser Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn as well as the judge presiding over his case to prepare arguments on whether the judge should recuse himself for partiality or for becoming a party to the case.

The order highlights the anomalous state of the case. Both Flynn and the prosecutors nearly three months ago agreed that the criminal “information” against him—allegedly lying to the FBI—should be dismissed. But District Judge Emmet Sullivan refuses to do so.

[...]

The order underlines Sullivan’s catch-22 situation, both Flynn and the Department of Justice (DOJ) noted in their written responses to his petition.

Only people with a “personal stake” in the proceedings can seek appellate review, the DOJ wrote in its July 20 response.

“A judge does not have—and under the [Constitution’s] Due Process Clause, cannot have—such a stake,” the department stated.

Flynn’s lawyers noted in his response that if Sullivan indeed has a personal stake in the case, it would disqualify him as its judge.


More:  https://www.theepochtimes.com/appeals-court-asks-whether-flynn-judge-should-recuse-himself-order-indicates_3451607.html

[LegalAmerican]

Another anti-American in our judicial system.  HE NEEDS TO BE IMPEACHED...if there is such a thing.  REMOVED, LOSE HIS LICENSE.

[Cyber Liberty]

Interesting.  So, the Court is asking about a motion for Recusal the three-judge version dismissed?  Maybe there is a price to be paid for the Judge's legal mechinations?   

[PeteS in CA]

Interesting.  So, the Court is asking about a motion for Recusal the three-judge version dismissed?  Maybe there is a price to be paid for the Judge's legal mechinations?   

I noticed that too. Not only is the full panel reconsidering the writ of mandamus, it is also reconsidering the ruling against removing Sullivan from the case. The panel also will consider whether Sullivan's appeal to the full panel made him a party in the case, also grounds for removing him as well as bolstering Flynn's argument that Sullivan has shown himself partial.

I continue to believe that Sullivan has been using the protracted process as punishment. He may have opened the wrong 55-gallon drum of worms with this appeal.