(no subject)
Jun. 28th, 2001 10:33 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
libertangoJust for my birthday, it seems, the US Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit have gone and given me a present: Vindication of some predictions.
A seven-judge panel today largely threw out Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson's decisions in US v. Microsoft.
I said at the time Jackson's decisions came down that regardless of how one felt about the merits of the case, his handling of the matter had been so blunt and ham-fisted he'd be lucky not to get disbarred.
The Appeals Court today agreed in spirit, if not fully in hyperbole. :) They overturned all his remedies, and a good chunk of the "findings of fact", and remanded the case back to the District level to be heard by a new judge, citing Jackson's "appearance of partiality". Given the usual level of deference given between judges (anyone remember how stinging it was, in Yes, Minister, for one top-level bureaucrat to say of another, "He may not be totally sound." ?) this may well be the end of Jackson's high-profile career.
A seven-judge panel today largely threw out Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson's decisions in US v. Microsoft.
I said at the time Jackson's decisions came down that regardless of how one felt about the merits of the case, his handling of the matter had been so blunt and ham-fisted he'd be lucky not to get disbarred.
The Appeals Court today agreed in spirit, if not fully in hyperbole. :) They overturned all his remedies, and a good chunk of the "findings of fact", and remanded the case back to the District level to be heard by a new judge, citing Jackson's "appearance of partiality". Given the usual level of deference given between judges (anyone remember how stinging it was, in Yes, Minister, for one top-level bureaucrat to say of another, "He may not be totally sound." ?) this may well be the end of Jackson's high-profile career.
