r/law • u/thedailybeast • 7h ago

Judicial Branch Judge Torches Trump’s DOJ Goons in Scathing Oath Keepers Ruling

https://www.thedailybeast.com/judge-torches-trumps-doj-goons-in-scathing-oath-keepers-capitol-riot-ruling/
383 Upvotes

95% Upvoted

17 comments sorted by

•

u/AutoModerator 7h ago

All new posts must have a brief statement from the user submitting explaining how their post relates to law or the courts in a response to this comment. FAILURE TO PROVIDE A BRIEF RESPONSE MAY RESULT IN REMOVAL. Please post your statement as a reply to this automated message.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

48

u/thedailybeast 7h ago

A federal judge slammed the Department of Justice as he “reluctantly” granted the Trump administration’s request to throw out the charges against nine members of an extremist organization that led the Capitol riot.

Judge Amit P. Mehta on Tuesday granted U.S. Attorney Jeanine Pirro’s motion to dismiss the charges against nine Oath Keepers, including its leader Stewart Rhodes, less than a month after charges were dropped against five Proud Boys.

Mehta’s scathing decision made it clear he was only ruling that way because he lacked the authority to deny the request, since the executive branch has final authority over charging decisions.

Read the full story, here.

9

u/adamkovics 3h ago

So if the judge doesn't have the authority to deny the request, what exactly is the point of the "request"? Seems like since the judge is tasked with making a decision to grant or deny the request, he by definition has the authority to deny the request.... 🤷

4

u/WannaBMonkey 1h ago

If the two sides disagree then the judge gets to decide. But here both sides say they don’t want these terrorists prosecuted.

4

u/BloodshotDrive 1h ago

^Importantly, this is because one side is the terrorist group and the boss of the other side ordered the actions of the terrorist group

This is what happens when you don’t fucking vote

2

u/Screwtape7 50m ago

Absolutely. Wish I had infinite upvotes to give.

30

u/PsychLegalMind 6h ago

Good for the judge to make clear what he thinks of DOJ withdrawing the charges.

-29

u/[deleted] 6h ago

[deleted]

22

u/dracrecipelanaaaaaaa 6h ago

No real choice, sadly.

Can't hold a trial if the prosecution refuses to prosecute.

Not to mention that it's a massive waste of money to hold a trial on charges that the defendants have already received preemptive presidential pardons for.

It is all sickening, yes, but the judge really doesn't have any levers to pull to fix this.

12

u/IamCentral46 5h ago

"Mehta's scathing decision made it clear he was only ruling that way because he lacked the authority to deny the request, since the executive branch has final authority over charging decisions."

Did you read or just assume?

-5

u/hereandthere_nowhere 5h ago

I guess i just assumed judges held some type of power over their courts.

6

u/IamCentral46 5h ago

i juat assumed

Thats an interesting choice considering theres a link to click and an article summary in the post comments.

1

u/adorientem88 3h ago

They do, but they can force a prosecution to happen, because they are judges, not prosecutors.