A legal expert suggests a recent judicial ruling could be so flawed that it warrants an unprecedented full-court review by an entire appeals panel—a rare step typically reserved for decisions of broad significance or legal error. The case may test whether the judge believes the lower court’s decision is not just incorrect but fundamentally problematic enough to merit an en banc hearing, where all active judges reconsider the matter. Such proceedings are uncommon, signaling potential concerns about precedent or systemic legal interpretation. The outcome could have lasting implications for how similar disputes are handled in the future.
This is a case in which Judge Sutton may agree that the decision is not merely wrong, but also en-banc-worthy.
