There have been courts sua sponte inventing new statutes of limitations due to covid. This is a minority practice; the majority of courts reject any authority to do so, absent an act of Congress. I am sure we will also see a SCOTUS case coming up on speedy trial rights as a result of covid too. As well as trials where defendants were forced to wear masks, juries were on zoom, and other non standard practices.
What the public does not fully understand is that judges basically do whatever the hell suits them. Law be damned. This includes SCOTUS. They'll sprinkle a few buzzwords in there to try and disguise it as a legitimate ruling based on the law. Whatever it takes to achieve their preferred outcome.
The executive has no ability to suspend the Constitution, nor the rules of criminal procedure. Congress can suspend habeas corpus, although Lincoln did so on his own. The Constitution is what gives the executive authority in the first place. One cannot suspend what grants authority to act.
Judges could easily decide not to exercise their discretion to dismiss under rule 48(b)(3). And that would be entirely permissible. The problem is that we have all seen how corrupt the judiciary is. Such a ruling would be entirely judge and fact dependent. Judge Sullivan, for example, would almost certainly never have a trial on cases arising out of this. He'd simply boot them under rule 48. And state that he could not agree that the government was justified in their delay bringing the defendant to trial is going to be one helluva burden for the government on appeal to get overturned.
what about state of emergency exec orders suspending standard lega processes?
There have been courts sua sponte inventing new statutes of limitations due to covid. This is a minority practice; the majority of courts reject any authority to do so, absent an act of Congress. I am sure we will also see a SCOTUS case coming up on speedy trial rights as a result of covid too. As well as trials where defendants were forced to wear masks, juries were on zoom, and other non standard practices.
What the public does not fully understand is that judges basically do whatever the hell suits them. Law be damned. This includes SCOTUS. They'll sprinkle a few buzzwords in there to try and disguise it as a legitimate ruling based on the law. Whatever it takes to achieve their preferred outcome.
The executive has no ability to suspend the Constitution, nor the rules of criminal procedure. Congress can suspend habeas corpus, although Lincoln did so on his own. The Constitution is what gives the executive authority in the first place. One cannot suspend what grants authority to act.
Judges could easily decide not to exercise their discretion to dismiss under rule 48(b)(3). And that would be entirely permissible. The problem is that we have all seen how corrupt the judiciary is. Such a ruling would be entirely judge and fact dependent. Judge Sullivan, for example, would almost certainly never have a trial on cases arising out of this. He'd simply boot them under rule 48. And state that he could not agree that the government was justified in their delay bringing the defendant to trial is going to be one helluva burden for the government on appeal to get overturned.