Monday, August 31, 2020

Bill Barr -- Unable To Read Federal Statutes. Y A W N. Flynn Is NOT In The Clear.


As predicted -- but good news for those of us who still believe in the notions of ordered liberty, and the rule of law, not men -- which, at least are still said. . . to underpin. . . our founding documents.

Onward this case wends. . . now Judge Sullivan may ask about the motives behind Mr. Barr's placing his thumb on the scales of justice, here.

. . . .As to Petitioner’s first two requests -- to compel the immediate grant of the Government’s motion, and to vacate the District Court’s appointment of amicus -- Petitioner has not established that he has “no other adequate means to attain the relief he desires.” Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Court for D.C., 542 U.S. 367, 380 (2004) (quoting Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court for N. Dist. of Cal., 426 U.S. 394, 403 (1976)). We also decline to mandate that the case be reassigned to a different district judge, because Petitioner has not established a clear and indisputable right to reassignment. See id. at 381. We therefore deny the Petition. . . .

A petition for a writ of mandamus “may never be employed as a substitute for appeal.” Will v. United States, 389 U.S. 90, 97 (1967); see also Roche v. Evaporated Milk Ass’n, 319 U.S. 21, 26 (1943) (“[Mandamus] may not appropriately be used merely as a substitute for the appeal procedure prescribed by the statute.”). The writ is a “potent weapon[],” “a drastic and extraordinary remedy reserved for really extraordinary causes.” Cheney, 542 U.S. at 380 (citations and internal quotation marks omitted). “[T]he writ cannot be used ‘to actually control the decision of the trial court,’” Platt v. Minn. Mining & Mfg. Co., 376 U.S. 240, 245 (1964) (quoting Bankers Life & Cas. Co. v. Holland, 346 U.S. 379, 383 (1953)), because “[a]s an appellate court, we are a court of review, not of first view,” Capitol Servs. Mgmt., Inc. v. Vesta Corp., 933 F.3d 784, 789 (D.C. Cir. 2019) (quoting Cutter v. Wilkinson, 544 U.S. 709, 718 n.7 (2005)). . . .


[Do read Judge Rao's 31 page dissent (to a 17 page 8-2 majority opinion) -- for comic relief, if you like.] Grinning, ear to ear, now as I busily prep and pack my Kenosha emergency riot / uprisings-countermeasures "go bag", for tomorrow. Of course, no weapons -- no firearms -- ever. But multiple water-bottles, BHO 44 tee shirts, polos and BLM masks -- and my BLM placards, from my front lawn, now all at the ready (as well as bail bonds -- and appearance forms, should the need arise). . . . Onward.



नमस्ते

No comments: