On May 21, 2020, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit directed U.S. District Judge Emmet G. Sullivan, who is presiding over the criminal case against former national security adviser Michael T. Flynn, to respond by June 1, 2020, to Flynn’s May 19, 2020, petition for writ of mandamus. The writ, if issued, would compel Judge Sullivan to grant the U.S. Department of Justice's May 7, 2020, motion to dismiss the criminal charges against Flynn.

In today’s episode, host Michael Buckner investigates the origin and purpose of the writ of mandamus. 

-------------- Comments, Questions & Feedback:  

Email: [email protected]  Facebook: @michaelbucknerlaw  YouTube: @michaelbucknerlaw  Instagram: @michaelbucknerlaw  Twitter: @mbucknerlaw  

--------------  Citations: 

Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137 (1803).

Kerr v. U.S. Dist. Court, 426 U.S. 394 (1976).

Cheney v. U.S. Dist. Court, 542 U.S. 367 (2004).

United States v. Fokker Servs., B.V., 818 F. 3d 733 (D.C. Cir. 2016).

Howard Brill, "Citizens' Relief Against . Inactive Federal Officials: Case Studies in Mandamus, Actions "In the Nature of Mandamus," And Mandatory Injunctions," 16 Akron Law Rev. 339 (July 2015).

Encyclopædia Britannica.

Edward Jenks, "The Preogative Writs in English Law," 32 Yale L.J. 6 (Apr. 1923).

---

Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/michaelbucknerlaw/messageSupport this podcast: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/michaelbucknerlaw/support