Replies

True and per § 2200.68 Recusal of the Judge:

.....(c) Request for recusal. Any party may request that the Judge, at any time following the Judge’s designation and before the filing of a decision, be recused under paragraph (a) or (b) of this section or both by filing with the Judge, promptly upon the discovery of the alleged facts, an affidavit setting forth in detail the matters alleged to constitute grounds for recusal.

(d) Ruling on request. If the Judge finds that a request for recusal has been filed with due diligence and that the material filed in support of the request establishes that recusal either is appropriate under paragraph (a) of this section or is required under paragraph (b) of this section, the Judge shall recuse themself from the proceeding. If the Judge denies a request for recusal, the Judge shall issue a ruling on the record, stating the grounds for denying the request, and shall proceed with the hearing, or, if the hearing has closed, proceed with the issuance of a decision under the provisions of § 2200.90.

Part A & B:

(a) Discretionary recusal. A Judge may recuse themself from a proceeding whenever the Judge deems it appropriate.

(b) Mandatory recusal. A Judge shall recuse themself under circumstances that would require disqualification of a Federal judge under Canon 3(C) of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges, except that the required recusal may be set aside under the conditions specified by Canon 3(D).

Canon 3 (c) of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges:

(1) A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to instances in which:

(a) the judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding;

(b) the judge served as a lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom the judge previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter, or the judge or lawyer has been a material witness;

(c) the judge knows that the judge, individually or as a fiduciary, or the judge’s spouse or minor child residing in the judge’s household, has a financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could be affected substantially by the outcome of the proceeding;

(d) the judge or the judge’s spouse, or a person related to either within the third degree of relationship, or the spouse of such a person is:

(i) a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, or trustee of a party;

(ii) acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;

(iii) known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding; or

(iv) to the judge’s knowledge likely to be a material witness in the proceeding;

(e) the judge has served in governmental employment and in that capacity participated as a judge (in a previous judicial position), counsel, advisor, or material witness concerning the proceeding or has expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy.

(2) A judge should keep informed about the judge’s personal and fiduciary financial interests and make a reasonable effort to keep informed about the personal financial interests of the judge’s spouse and minor children residing in the judge’s household.
*****************************

Seeking Disqualification of a Federal Judge

https://ronaldwchapman.com/judicial-bias

Understanding 28 U.S.C. § 144

Section 144 addresses situations where a party believes that the judge has a personal bias or prejudice against them or in favor of any adverse party. The key requirements are:

Affidavit: The party must file a timely and sufficient affidavit stating the facts and reasons for the belief that bias or prejudice exists.

Timing: The affidavit must be filed not less than ten days before the beginning of the term at which the proceeding is to be heard, unless there is good cause for delay.

Content: The affidavit must state the facts and reasons for the belief that bias or prejudice exists, and it must be accompanied by a certificate of good faith from counsel.

Understanding 28 U.S.C. § 455

Section 455 provides broader grounds for disqualification and is applicable even without a party’s motion. The key provisions include:

Personal Bias or Prejudice: A judge shall disqualify themselves in any proceeding in which their impartiality might reasonably be questioned (§ 455(a)).

Specific Circumstances: Disqualification is required if the judge has personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts, has a financial interest in the matter, or has previously acted as a lawyer in the matter (§ 455(b)).

Associations: If a judge or their family has an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding, disqualification is mandatory (§ 455(b)(4)).

What to Expect

Filing the Motion: You will need to file a motion with a supporting affidavit as specified in 28 U.S.C. § 144. The affidavit should detail specific facts and circumstances that suggest bias or prejudice.

Judge’s Response: The judge will review the motion and affidavit. If the judge finds the affidavit sufficient, they must step aside, and another judge will be assigned. If the judge finds the affidavit insufficient, they may continue to preside over the case.

Procedural Review: The judge’s decision on recusal can be reviewed by an appellate court if it is challenged. The appellate court will evaluate whether the judge abused their discretion in deciding not to recuse themselves.

Standard of Review: The appellate court typically reviews the denial of a recusal motion for abuse of discretion. This means the court will consider whether the judge’s decision was arbitrary or unreasonable based on the evidence presented.

Strategic Considerations

When filing a motion for judicial bias, consider the following strategic points:

Specificity and Timing: Ensure that the affidavit is specific and timely. General allegations of bias are insufficient; the affidavit must detail particular incidents or statements that demonstrate bias.

Good Faith: The motion must be filed in good faith. Frivolous or strategic filings intended to delay proceedings can backfire and potentially result in sanctions.
*****************

Filing for judicial recusal could extend the case for a lengthy time period, which given the political pressure from voters to arrest swamp critters, may not be feasible. This could be another example of how corrupt the federal judiciary is or since the judge is a Biden appointee the judge could be perturbed at how the demo-fascist have treated Biden and judge the case without bias. As things unfold it will be interesting to watch.