Flynn is a defendant without a prosecutor and litigation now without any controversy between the actual parties to the case. Instead of promptly granting dismissal as required as a matter of law, judge sullivan denied two defense motioning opposing any amicus at all, appointed mr. Gleeson to usurp the job of prosecutor, and went forth to right theening wrotes he perceived. To right the wrongs he perceived. The job of the United States attorney is otherwise occupied. In adding these unconstitutional burdens of process to punish Michael Flynn, judge sullivan discarded any semblance of the unbiased, impartial adjudicator this court extolled in the 2019 chapter of that case saga. As a cornerstone of any system of justice worth the label. Four rulings are required to conclude this novel article three excess. Judge sullivans petition for rehearing must be flatly denied with clear language that a judge has no injury and no standing to seek relief of this courts rulings. Because judge sullivan
We will and with a brief rebuttal from mr. Flynns counsel and the council of United States. Please proceed. Thank you chief judge, may it please the court, general flynn is a defendant without a prosecutor, and litigation without controversy between the parties to the case. Instead of granting dismissal as required as a matter of law, John Sullivan denied defense motions, appointed mr. Gleason to usurp the job of the prosecutor, raised perjury but as iter his head, was noted, the job of United States attorney is occupied. Adding the unconstitutional burdens of process to punish michael flynn, John Sullivan discarded any semblance of the adjudicator. As a cornerstone of any system of justice worth the label. Required. Gs are judge sullivans position for rehearing must be flatly denied with language that a judge has no injury or standing to seek relief in this court. Sullivan has invested himself in the prosecution of general flynn, it is mandated disqualification for the glaring appeara
To see whether he would defer. Were no rule 48, the government could stop pursuing the case and send a letter to the court and that would be done and that would be effective in ending, even though there was a plea that was accepted. Mr wall i think so because there would no longer be any article three between parties and authority beyond rule 48 for the District Court to keep it alive. That seems to me at least as important or more important on the criminal side where you are not just talking about an adversarial contest between private parties, youre talking about a contest between a private that is in and a branch of government private citizen and a branch of government. The district is not explaining how it can keep alive a controversy that is not over the executives objection. If the rule 48 has been granted, then what is the purpose of allowing unnecessary proceedings to play inside that . If the court thinks there are no harms to the executives. I think this has been clarifying,
Hearing on the covid19 pandemic best practices and opportunities for innovation. Before we begin i would like to remind members that we have established in the military and the distribution list dedicated to circulating red materials that members might want to offer is part of our hearing today. If you would like to submit that terry will. Send them to the email address that has been previously distributed to you all and we will circulate the materials to members and staff as quickly as we can. I also ask unanimous consent that following items be entered into the record. A letter to chairman johnson and Ranking Member roby and the American Association of judges and the results of a study in a recent survey by the federal Bar Association and its members on Legal Practices in the covid19 era. Without objection, so admitted. I will recognize myself for an opening statement. Welcome to the Senate Committee hearing on courts during the covid19 pandemic best practices and opportunities for i
Bill providing an additional 3 trillion in coronavirus economic stimulus. We expect to see that bill on the floor tomorrow. Also to discuss promoting voting and Committee Work. And now back to the start of todays hearing, this is cspan3. [inaudible conversations] the rules committee will come to order. Before i give my Opening Statement i just want to read a guidance from the attending physician, doctor monahan. We asked him specifically about the use of face coverings during proceedings like these and while he has not mandated their use he did share that and i quote, my preferences that members retain their face coverings when speaking as an activity which can release virus particles. Especially if the speaking is of a highspirited nature. S ive never had a meeting in the rules committee that hasnt been of a highspirited nature so we will leave it up to individual members to decide but i think to be cautious here i will keep mine on and i hope that everybody else will be mindful of th