if the DOJ no longer wants to prosecute the case, isn’t this just the SCOTUS saying, " OK?" which was probably a foregone conclusion after the Solicitor General told them they were abandoning the case back in Feb?
Courts can refuse to dismiss a case, though it is rare. In https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/434/22/ lower courts had refused a dismissal, though that was overridden by the Supreme Court with the argument that dismissal
cannot fairly be characterized as “clearly contrary to manifest public interest.”
In the case of Bannon, it seems to me that it is very much contrary to public interest to dismiss. We are in extraordinary times, and this is an extraordinarily corrupt dismissal. So if we think it was a foregone conclusion, then it is only because we know SCROTUS is corrupt, right? Not because the law said so.
Courts can refuse to dismiss a case, though it is rare. In https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/434/22/ lower courts had refused a dismissal, though that was overridden by the Supreme Court with the argument that dismissal
In the case of Bannon, it seems to me that it is very much contrary to public interest to dismiss. We are in extraordinary times, and this is an extraordinarily corrupt dismissal. So if we think it was a foregone conclusion, then it is only because we know SCROTUS is corrupt, right? Not because the law said so.