Notorious RBG authored a unanimous SCOTUS opinion last week that directly refutes the actions Judge Sullivan in the Flynn case is using in an attempt to continue the prosecution of Flynn despite DOJ dropping it.
SCOTUS happened to rule on a case where a judge brought in outside parties, immigrant rights groups and public defenders, to submit briefs pertaining to the case. Similar to what Judge Sullivan is calling for in the Flynn case.
U.S. v. Sineneng-Smith RBG wrote basically judges are passive players in cases and the cases presented not actively pursuing right or wrong. They should adjudicate based on information presented by the presenting parties.
From RBG: “[C]ourts are essentially passive instruments of government.” United States v. Samuels, 808 F. 2d 1298, 1301 (CA8 1987) (Arnold, J., concurring in denial of reh’g en banc)). They “do not, or should not, sally forth each day looking for wrongs to right. [They] wait for cases to come to [them], and when [cases arise, courts] normally decide only questions presented by the parties.”
Imagine a world.... a world so stupid.... where you have to tell judges that they don't get to prosecute the case AND rule on the case at the same time.