BRIEF OF AMICUS CURIAE CITIZENS FOR RESPONSIBILITY AND ETHICS IN WASHINGTON IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENT

The issue falls within neither the collateral order doctrine nor the pendent jurisdiction of the court of appeals. [...] Considering the strong public interest in the prosecution, this Court should refrain from addressing the issue before the parties litigate it in the lower courts. [...] Here, the court of appeals correctly concluded that it does not have appellate jurisdiction of the appointment objection, and this Court therefore lacks jurisdiction over the merits thereof. [...] “Section 1291 of the Judicial Code confines appeals as of right to those from ‘final decisions of the district courts,’” ordinarily decisions that “end[] the litigation on the merits and leave[] nothing more for the court to do but execute the judgment.” Digital Equip. [...] The court of appeals correctly found that, while the issue of immunity falls within the collateral order doctrine, the appointment objection does not.