On June 1, Judge Emmet Sullivan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia submitted a brief to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit outlining his rationale for declining to immediately dismiss the case against former national security adviser Michael Flynn after the Justice Department moved to drop their charges. A panel of judges on the D.C. Circuit had ordered Sullivan on May 21 to respond to an emergency request by Flynn that the appeals court force him to drop the case.
Latest in D.C. Circuit
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit has denied President Trump's petition for a rehearing en banc in Donald J. Trump v. Mazars, LLP et al. The order was issued per curiam with Judges Karen Henderson, Gregory Katsas and Neomi Rao dissenting. The court also denied a motion for a panel rehearing. Both orders can be view below.
Denial of Rehearing En Banc
With data breach incidents on the rise, federal courts are grappling with the issue of standing in class action lawsuits arising from data breaches.
Stuart McKeever has petitioned the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit for a rehearing en banc in McKeever v. Barr, concerning the judiciary's inherent authority to release grand jury material. A D.C. Circuit panel ruled against McKeever in early April, finding that courts do not have such authority. The petition is available here and below.
On Jan. 22, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit heard oral argument in In re: Abd Al-Rahim Hussein Al-Nashiri. Judges Judith Rogers, David Tatel and Thomas Griffith reviewed Abd Al Rahim Hussein Al-Nashiri’s (“Al-Nashiri”) request for a writ of mandamus and prohibition directing the vacatur of the orders convening the military commission which tried him.
This Wednesday at 9:30 a.m., a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit (Rogers, Tatel and Griffith, JJ.) will hold a rare August argument session to hear the latest petition for a writ of mandamus from the Guantánamo military commissions.
The U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit today handed down an opinion dismissing a suit filed by the family members of individuals reportedly killed in a U.S. drone strike in Yemen in 2012, which the plaintiffs allege was conducted in violation of domestic and international law. Though the court dismissed the case as presenting a non-justiciable political question, Judge Janice Rogers Brown's concurrence presents a strong criticism of the existing oversight regime for targeted killing.
The opinion is available in full below.
Here is the brief for Captain Smith that was filed yesterday afternoon in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, along with the joint appendix. The case will be ready for argument later this spring. The brief represents a great deal of new research into the fundamental issues by David Remes, myself and a team of Yale law students.
The brief was submitted to the D.C. Circuit yesterday, by the Guantanamo detainee's lawyers. We thus await decision from the appeals court as to whether it will order en banc rehearing in this long-running military commissions case.
It almost certainly won't, in my view—but we'll see soon enough.
On June 12, a three-judge panel of the D.C. Circuit handed down its decision in the most recent iteration of Al Bahlul v. United States, vacating defendant Ali Hamza Suliman al Bahlul’s conviction for inchoate conspiracy. Al Bahlul’s other convictions had previously been vacated by the D.C.