Email this article Printer friendly page
 For Immediate Release
Dec 11, 2000 Contact: Press Office
202-646-5172
SHOULD JUSTICE SCALIA RECUSE HIMSELF?

Son Works for Law Firm Representing Governor Bush in Supreme Court Case and Former Law Clerk Works for Law Firm Representing Governor Bush in Underlying Lower Court Case in Leon County

Conflict Rules Do Not Technically Require Disqualification

(Washington, D.C.) Today, lawyers for Gov. George W. Bush will be arguing before the U.S. Supreme Court as to whether or not the decision of the Florida Supreme Court should be reversed or affirmed. The lead counsel, Theodore Olson, Esq. of the law firm Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher, is a partner in the law firm of Justice Scalia’s son. In addition, a former Supreme Court law clerk of Justice Scalia works for the law firm of Bartlett & Beck, the trial law firm which took the lead role for Gov. Bush in questioning witnesses in the lower court proceeding giving rise to the Supreme Court case.

Lanny Davis, a Clinton-Gore Administration surrogate, has called for Justice Scalia to recuse himself. 28 U.S.C. Section 455, the rule which governs such recusal, provides in part:
    1. Any justice, judge, or magistrate of the United States shall disqualify himself in
    any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.

    1. He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances:
    . . .
    5. He or his spouse, or a person within the third degree of relationship to either of
    them, or the spouse of such a person:
    . . .
      1. Is acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;
      2. Is known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially
      affected by the outcome of the proceeding. . . .
In the past, Judicial Watch has taken the position (following the law) that even the appearance of impartiality should cause or require judges to recuse themselves.

Accordingly, since the decision to recuse himself is Justice Scalia’s alone, Judicial Watch calls upon him to consider the appropriate course of action and make public his reasoning (as Chief Justice Rehnquist did with the Microsoft case). The fact that Lanny Davis is calling for the recusal should not color Justice Scalia’s decision to do what he believes is appropriate in this case.

Top of Page