Epstein Secrets

s ability to oversee the Executive Branch's exercise of prosecutorial discretion. "Mudicial authority is ... at its most limited when reviewing the Executive's exercise of discretion over charging determinations." U.S. v. Fokker Services, BV, 818 F.3d 733, 741 (D.C.Cir. 2016), citing Cmty. for Creative No

mons 509 U.S. 259, 272-73 (1993). 3 EFTA00601684 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 421 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2017 Page 4 of 11 Referring to Rubin the district court added that, "Not only do victims not have a veto, they do not have the right to dictate government strategy or demand who to pros

s ability to oversee the Executive Branch's exercise of prosecutorial discretion. "Mudicial authority is ... at its most limited when reviewing the Executive's exercise of discretion over charging determinations." U.S. v. Fokker Services, BV, 818 F.3d 733, 741 (D.C.Cir. 2016), citing Cmty. for Creative No

mons 509 U.S. 259, 272-73 (1993). 3 EFTA00799966 Case 9:08-cv-80736-KAM Document 421 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/25/2017 Page 4 of 11 Referring to Rubin the district court added that, "Not only do victims not have a veto, they do not have the right to dictate government strategy or demand who to pros

udicial records and those that may not"). In general, "there is no First Amendment right of access to government processes," including those of the Executive branch. United States v. Gonzales, 50 F.3d 1246, 1260 (10th Cir. 1998). As the District of Columbia Circuit stated in evaluating whether a plea agre

("the U.S. Attorney didn't have an obligation under the CVRA to confer with [victims] until after was filed and a case opened"); United States v. Rubin, 558 F. Supp. 2d 411, 417 2008) ("the CVRA appears to simply accord [victims] standing to vindicate their rights as victims under the CVRA and to