My understanding is that when the government moves to dismiss an indictment the judge's discretion is extremely limited. Basically--again, in my understanding--as long as the government doesn't appear intent on abusing a defendant then the judge has to grant the motion. How would the government abuse a defendant by dismissing the indictment? This is how: by re-indicting and then dismissing again, and repeating the process indefinitely. In this case the government is asking to dismiss with prejudice--meaning, the charges can never, ever, be brought again. Therefore, the judge ultimately must dismiss. As I understand it.
The judge doesn't get to play prosecutor and second guess the government. So why would a judge invite dumb ass briefs from people who hate Trump and therefore hate Flynn? Those briefs can't possibly have anything sensible to say. And yet, it appears that Sullivan is more or less inviting an outpouring of briefs to create a public outcry. Unless I'm misunderstanding something.
Looking at the docket entries (#201 not present), we suspect an amicus brief has already been filed.— Techno Fog (@Techno_Fog) May 12, 2020
Perhaps by the former DOJ employees who want Sullivan to improperly proceed to sentencing.
Judge Sullivan risks turning this into a circus. pic.twitter.com/hJpxForsdS
Judge Emmet G. Sullivan just signaled he’s not interested in the law, due process, equal rights, or justice. He already called Flynn a traitor in open court, and now he’s going to invite left-wing lawyers write his final order against Flynn for him.
5:26 PM · May 12, 2020