I came into it late and have to start working, so I’ll listen to the bulk of it later. However, listening to the Solicitor General arguing, I was struck by Judge Wilkins finally getting to the matter I have asked here many times:
If a defendant has been convicted and sentenced, and there is video of the Attorney General accepting a briefcase of cash from an agent of the defendant, and the Government requests that the case be dismissed … does the District Judge have to dismiss the case?
The Solicitor General’s answer?
Yes. The defendant gets off scot free.
Perhaps the Attorney General can be investigated for bribery and prosecuted, but the defendant gets off scot free — under a rule (Rule 48) that requires “leave of court” for a dismissal.
That strikes me as an extreme position. Am I the only one?