Thanks Jane!
All; To be clear this is happening at the appellate level. Arguments will be January 9
Snip....
for the District of Columbia Circuit
ORAL ARGUMENT SET FOR JANUARY 9, 2024
No. 23-3228
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
v.
DONALD J. TRUMP,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeal from the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia
Criminal Case No. 1:23-cr-00257-TSC (Hon. Tanya S. Chutkan)
BRIEF OF FORMER ATTORNEY GENERAL EDWIN MEESE III
AND LAW PROFESSORS
STEVEN G. CALABRESI AND GARY S. LAWSON
AS AMICI CURIAE SUPPORTING NEITHER PARTY
December 30, 2023
GENE C. SCHAERR
Counsel of Record
JUSTIN A. MILLER*
AARON C. WARD*
SCHAERR | JAFFE LLP
1717 K Street NW, Suite 900
Washington, DC 20006
(202) 787-1060
gschaerr@schaerr-jaffe.com
Counsel for Amici Curiae
United States Court of Appeal
....snip
Based on citizen observations of how this “court” works I think they really do not want to find that Jack Smith does not have authority as Special Council.
From Attny Meese’s Amicus brief:
“No Statute Authorizes the Position of Special Counsel
Supposedly Held by Smith.
In our constitutional system, Congress alone has the authority to
create federal offices not established by the Constitution. And the
Attorney General cannot ex nihilo fashion offices as he sees fit. Nor has
Congress given the Attorney General power to appoint a Special Counsel
of this nature. Thus, without legally holding any office, Smith cannot
wield the authority of the United States, including his present attempt
to prosecute Defendant.” (More at link)