"Extraordinary" doesn't cover it. A federal district court judge asking for briefs on an issue shouldn't be subject to appeal—given that Flynn isn't incarcerated and is post-plea, meaning DOJ prosecutors no longer hold his fate in their hands—let alone result in a move like this.
NYT: "'Everything about this case is unusual,' said David Sklansky, a Stanford professor of criminal law. 'It's unusual to ask a higher court to direct a lower court to do something before the lower court has had a chance to make up its own mind in the first instance.'"
*Yep*.
*Yep*.
PS/ It's not even clear what's being appealed, as no decision has been rendered. Flynn, who's not incarcerated, is complaining of—what—a *delay* in his case? He's post-plea... so on what basis, precisely, is a several-week delay in sentencing violating his constitutional rights?
PS2/ Here's what I'd do. Take at face value the invitation from the Court of Appeals to hurry the hell up and do just that: haul Flynn into court, sentence him to 6 months in federal prison, and remand him. Sullivan has every right in the world to do that as the sentencing judge.
PS3/ Sullivan should also initiate contempt proceedings, so that as Flynn begins his six-month sentence—or more, if Sullivan holds that DOJ pulling out of the plea agreement allows him to sentence Flynn to more—he's also facing additional federal prison time on a contempt charge.
