A well known D.C. attorney, who previously represented Brett Kavanaugh and aides to Hillary Clinton, is now representing the federal judge who’s mired in a dispute over his handling of the Michael Flynn case.
A little help here. Why is Sullivan hiring counsel?
So when a judge hires an attorney to represent him in another court, who is paying the attorney?
Flynn repeatedly lied to the FBI about his contacts with the Russians, and has now almost certainly perjured himself in court. Beth Willinson’s father is a retired Navy captain (guess which country topped America’s enemies list at the time he served) and she was in the Army JAG corp. Beth Wilkinson is not someone to take traitors like Flynn lightly.
Good question, dont. I can’t answer it.
Must say that it must be a lawyer’s dream to be able to list a federal judge as a client on the resume.
BTW, the article doesn’t but should point out that the vast majority of legal observers think the appeals court panel is absolutely bonkers for even agreeing to hear the writ of mandamus request. There is nothing in the request that could not be addressed through the regular appeals process. But…the makeup of the panel? Henderson, a reagan/bush appointee with a very right-wing track history, Wilkins, an obama appointee, and Neomi Rao, an imPotus appointee somewhat er, famous, for writing in a dissent that congress may not investigate the president to determine if they should open an impeachment unvestigation, unless they are already impeaching him.
One of Wilkinson’s besties is also on the DC Circuit court: Merrick Garland.
Beth is a good pick, and that’s all I’m going to say about that.
Way OT, but this is making me think something is amiss.
.
Not on this panel, however.
Re txlayer re Garland: True, but this seems like a candidate for eventual en banc review, unless it skips to SCOTUS for the eventual 5-4 IOKIYAR treatment.
Because Flynn’s team filed the motion making the court the respondent. Normally DoJ would take on the responsibility of filing a response, but the DoJ is absent here and the court still has to file a brief. So either Sullivan and his clerks do it themselves or they hire counsel. They chose to hire counsel. IANAL but was once married to one.
It’s not insane to request a response from the trial judge when the DOJ is refusing to prosecute the case against the defendant. The makeup of the panel is concerning (and Rao is, of course, 100% on the MAGA Train), but they have not yet done anything particularly untoward.
As to whether there is an adequate remedy by ordinary appeal, there is at least an argument to be made that appeal is not adequate redress for sentencing and final judgment when the DOJ has agreed to dismissal. It’s not a great argument, but it’s also not insane.
This one happens to have represented Brent Kavanaugh during his appointment to the SC so this won’t even be the highest profile judge on her list.
She’s likely a bit beyond that now.
Thanks Forrest.
Best news have seen all day.
As @littlegirlblue and @roger_mexico noted, Sullivan has to file a brief to the Appeals Court. There’s an old saying: He who represents himself has a fool for a client. That even applies to lawyers and judges.
Probably, but it’s a little weird because it’s on mandamus instead of appeal after final judgment. I can see a world in which the panel rules that it’s an abuse of discretion not to dismiss the case after the government moves to do so, and in which a majority of the en banc court decides that’s not an unreasonable decision. The weirdness is that the en banc court could let it slide without any possibility of a formal appeal from the subsequent dismissal.