President Donald Trump pardoned his former National Security Advisor Lt. Gen. Michael Flynn (U.S. Army ret.) in the corrupt Russia collusion hoax investigation on Wednesday, November 25. The Department of Justice notified Judge Emmet Sullivan on Monday, November 30 about the pardon and (again) asked for the case against Flynn to be dismissed. Sullivan has not yet acted on the pardon and today, Friday, December 4, a fellow judge on the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, Senior Judge Reggie Walton, said at a court hearing in a civil case involving FOIA requests about the Flynn investigation that Sullivan may challenge the Flynn pardon as too broad, according to a report by the National Law Journal.
Judge Reggie Walton.
Judge Emmet Sullivan.
A trial judge raised the possibility that another federal judge overseeing Michael Flynn’s case could find that President Donald Trump’s pardon of Flynn is too broad, if it unlawfully protects the former national security adviser from future prosecutions.
U.S. District Judge Reggie Walton said at a hearing Friday that he doesn’t think U.S. District Judge Emmet Sullivan, his colleague presiding over the Flynn case, “has a lot of options in reference to what he does” after the pardon was granted, “unless he takes the position that the wording of the pardon is too broad, in that it provides protections beyond the date of the pardon.”
“I don’t know what impact that would have, what decision he would make, if he makes that determination that the pardon of Mr. Flynn is for a period that the law does not permit. I don’t know if that’s correct or not,” the judge continued. “Theoretically, the decision could be reached because the wording in the pardon seems to be very, very broad. It could be construed, I think, as extending protections against criminal prosecutions after the date the pardon was issued.”