(Papers to be published in Review of Litigation)
One or more presenters will be selected from a call for papers.
The legal landscape for judicial disqualification has received a few recent jolts: Caperton v. A.T. Massey Coal Co., 556 U.S. ___, 129 S. Ct. 2252 (June 2009), where the United States Supreme Court ruled that due process required disqualification of a West Virginia supreme court justice whose campaign received $3 million in campaign support; Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission, 558 U.S. ___, 130 S. Ct. 876 (January 2010), the Supreme Court invalidated restrictions on direct corporate expenditures concerning political issues that could include judicial electoral processes; and the ABA’s 2007 Model Code of Judicial Conduct, which recommended that states require disqualification in cases of substantial campaign contributions. With interest groups’ asserting themselves into judicial elections with zeal, and scholars’ noting the risk of judges’ unconscious bias, issues of judicial disqualification are more prominent than ever in litigation. The program will explore the current shape of judicial recusal, including efforts to limit the influence of money in judicial elections and the degree to which the introduction of expanded due process considerations has altered the disqualification equation. The program includes speakers selected from a Call for Papers.
Business Meeting at Program Conclusion.