We found a match
Your institution may have access to this item. Find your institution then sign in to continue.
- Title
RECUSAL AND BUSH V GORE.
- Authors
Sinnoti-Armstrong, Walter
- Abstract
The article presents the author's view on the debate about the recusal of Justices Clarence Thomas and Antonin Scalia in the U.S. Supreme Court case Bush v. Gore. In order to do so, he looks at both the law of recusal and its purpose. There have been reports that two of Justice Scalia's sons were lawyers in firms representing President George W. Bush and that Justice Thomas' wife was collecting applications from candidates who wanted to be recommended by the Heritage Foundation for positions in a Bush Administration. The main reason for several calls for recusal of these judges were these connections with Bush. The Section 455 of Title 28 of the United States Code lists many grounds for disqualification of judges. Subsection (b)(5)(iii) refers to "an interest" without any limit on the kinds of interests that might require recusal, except that the interest must be substantial enough to be "substantially affected." The "third degree of relationship" is defined to include great-grandparent, grandparent, parent, uncle, aunt, brother, sister, child, grandchild, great-grandchild, nephew, and niece. Highlighting the error of not disqualifying the judges, despite many calls for the recusal, the author suggests that the policy and practices of the Supreme Court must change so as to avoid repetition of this error.
- Subjects
UNITED States; DISQUALIFICATION of judges; JUDGES; THOMAS, Clarence, 1948-; SCALIA, Antonin, 1936-2016; UNITED States. Supreme Court; BUSH v. Gore; LEGAL judgments; JUDICIAL ethics; CLAUSES (Law)
- Publication
Law & Philosophy, 2002, Vol 21, Issue 2, p221
- ISSN
0167-5249
- Publication type
Article
- DOI
10.2307/3505131