On Aug. 31, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, sitting en banc, denied an emergency petition for a writ of mandamus submitted by former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. Flynn’s motion sought to compel District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan to grant the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the charges against him with prejudice, vacate Sullivan’s order appointing John Gleeson as amicus and reassign the case to another district judge. In a per curiam opinion, eight members of the en banc D.C. Circuit denied Flynn’s petition on the grounds that issuance of the writ was premature and Flynn failed to meet the demanding requirements for the extraordinary relief of a writ of mandamus. As a result, Sullivan may continue with his original plan to consider the Justice Department’s motion, which includes the appointment of Gleeson as amicus, adversarial briefing from the parties and the holding of a hearing.
Повторю, дело Флинна по-прежнему все в том же суде с все тем же судьей. Решение пока не вынесено.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2020-11-20 02:55 am (UTC)https://www.lawfareblog.com/summary-en-banc-dc-circuit-denies-flynns-emergency-petition-writ-mandamus
On Aug. 31, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, sitting en banc, denied an emergency petition for a writ of mandamus submitted by former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn. Flynn’s motion sought to compel District Court Judge Emmet G. Sullivan to grant the Justice Department’s motion to dismiss the charges against him with prejudice, vacate Sullivan’s order appointing John Gleeson as amicus and reassign the case to another district judge. In a per curiam opinion, eight members of the en banc D.C. Circuit denied Flynn’s petition on the grounds that issuance of the writ was premature and Flynn failed to meet the demanding requirements for the extraordinary relief of a writ of mandamus. As a result, Sullivan may continue with his original plan to consider the Justice Department’s motion, which includes the appointment of Gleeson as amicus, adversarial briefing from the parties and the holding of a hearing.
Повторю, дело Флинна по-прежнему все в том же суде с все тем же судьей. Решение пока не вынесено.