[vienna]

Originally Posted by bweiss

Uh-oh, somebody's on Santa's naughty list, again.


Allegations of Procedural Missteps Surface Against Special Counsel John Luman Smith, aka Jack Smith

by Jim Hᴏft Dec. 24, 2023 8:00 am

Former Ronald Reagan Attorney General Edwin Meese, along with Professors Gary Lawson and Steven Calabresi, submitted a petition to the Supreme Court
last week seeking a writ of certiorari in response to Jack (John Lumen) Smith’s petition to expedite appeal of immunity ruling.
The former US Attorney General contends that Jack Smith, acting as Special Counsel, was not appropriately appointed.
Consequently, they argue, all legal actions undertaken by Smith should be considered null and void.

The trio, in their petition to the Supreme Court, argue that since Smith was directly hired by the current Attorney General,
Merrick Garland, the constitutional process of presidential nomination and full Senate confirmation was bypassed.
They state that Smith’s various legal actions, performed under the guise of law, should only be carried out by individuals
who have been duly appointed as federal officers to legitimately established federal offices.


https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2023/12/gateway-pundit-exclusive-allegations-procedural-missteps-surface-against/


Now that's the story, here's the red meat.

No. 23-624


In the Supreme Court of the United States


UNITED STATES, Petitioner,
v.
DONALD J. TRUMP


On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari Before Judgment
to the United States Court of Appeals
for the District of Columbia Circuit

BRIEF OF FORMER ATTORNEY
GENERAL EDWIN MEESE III AND LAW
PROFESSORS STEVEN G. CALABRESI AND
GARY S. LAWSON AS AMICI CURIAE
SUPPORTING NEITHER PARTY

QUESTION PRESENTED
"Whether private citizen Jack Smith lacks authority
to represent the United States, which jurisdictional re-
quirement must exist at all stages of litigation, and
which cannot be waived, in filing his Petition for a
Writ of Certiorari in this Court?"

https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/23/23-624/293864/20231220140217967_US%20v.%20Trump%20amicus%20final .pdf


From Canto VI, XVII in the play “Marmion” by Sir Walter Scott.

"Oh! What a tangled web we weave, when first we practice to deceive"

A bit of a yawn and a massive "nothing burger"...




The above referenced court filing is of no material substance as far as actual procedural challenges go; it is not an actual charge or indictment; it is what is referred to as an amicus curiae brief or an amicus brief, for short; amicus curiae is Latin for "friend of the court" and is used by persons or entities not actually involved in a case being considered for appeal to express their concerns regarding a case being appealed; virtually anyone can submit an amicus brief and whether or not it has any relevant impact on a case is up to the appellate judge or judges; it is not a formal charge or cause of action and, in may cases, is often ignored in the final judgement; it may be noted the filing includes the wording "AMICI CURIAE SUPPORTING NEITHER PARTY", which is more boilerplate language and a bit of sophistry since the intent of such filings is more often than not reveals the partiality of the filer...

In short, an amicus brief is little more than someone not involved in the actual appellant case give their "two cents", little more...


...and as far as Meese, Calibressi and Lawson are concerned, they appear to have a bit of a cottage industry, together or in various combinations, of filing amicus briefs for various entities and persons, usually of the Far-Right or Conservative leanings; Calibressi used to work for Meese under the Regan Administration; Lawson is an academic lawyer and had been a clerk for Justice Scalia (SCOTUS) for many years and a founder of the Federalist Society; impartiality is not a strong point for these guys...



<O>