Self-study
P1
The current approach to recusal and disqualification of judges heavily emphasizes appearance-based analysis. ████████████ █████ ██ ███████ ███ ██████ █████████ █████ ██ ███ █████████ ██ ████ ███████████ ███ ███ ██████████ ██ ████████████ ██████ ███ ████████ ██ ██████ ██████ ███████ ██████████ ████ ███ ████ ██ █████ █████ ████████████ █████ ██████████ ██ ███████████ ██ ████ ██████████████ ████████ █████ █ █████ ██ █ █████ ██████████ ██ ███████ ████████████████ ██ █ █████ ███ █████ ██ █████ ██████████████ ███ ██████████████ ███ ███████ █████ ████ ███ █████ ██████
Intro to Topic ·
Judicial recusal
Currently, judges recuse themselves based on appearance of impropriety. Even if there's no real conflict of interest, as long as there is the appearance of impropriety, then they are expected to recuse themselves.
P2
███ █████ ███████ █████ ████████ ██ █████ ██████ ████████████████ █████████ ██ ███████ ███ █████████ ████████████ ████████ ██████████ ██ ██████████████ ███████ ██████ ███ ████ ██ █████ ███████████ ██ ████ ██ ███ ██ █████████ ███ ██████ ███
Criticism ·
Recusal rules are too vague
Criticism ·
Focus on appearance of bias instead of actual bias is a mistake
Actual bias is what matters. Focusing on appearance of bias may distract from noticing actual bias.
P3
███ ████████ ██ ███ ███ ██ ███ ██████████ ██ █████████ █████████ ████ ██████████ ████ ████ ████ ██ ██ ██ ████ █████████ ███ ███████████ ██ ██████ ███████ ██ ███ ███ ██ █████ █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ████████ ██ ███████ ██████████ ███ ████ ███ ██ ███████ ████████ █████ ████████ ████████████ ██ ██ ███████ ██████ ██ ████ █████ █████████ ████████████ ████████████ ██ ██████ █████████ ████████████████ ███████ ████████ █████ ███████ ██████ ██ █████████ ████ ██████████ █████████ ██████ ██ ████████ ██ ███ ███████████ ██ █ ███████ ███████████ ██ ██████ ███ ███████ ███ █ ███████ ████████ ██ ███████ ██ ██ ███ █████ ███████ ███████ ████████ ███ █████ █████ ███ ███ ████████ ████████ █████ ██ ███ ██████ ██ ███ █████ ████ ███ ██████ ██████ ███ ██ ████████ ██ ███████ ███ ████ ███ ███ ██████ ███████████ ███ ██████ ████ ██████ ██ ████████ ██ ████ ███ █████ █████████ ██ ███ █████ ██ █████ █████ ████████ █████████ ████ █████
Proposed Solution ·
Transparent, written reasoning
If judge recuse, they should write out their reasons for recusing. If judge does not recuse, then write out their reasons for reaching their decision on the case.
P4
█ █████████ █████████ ██ ████ ███ █████████ █████ ██ ███ ██████ ███████ ███████ █████████ ███ ███ ██ ███ ███████
Counterpoint ·
Written reason may be insincere
Real reason may be hidden.
Rebuttal ·
Doesn't matter
As long as impartial judges can read and agree with the explicit written reasoning, then whatever hidden real reasons don't matter.
Passage Style
Problem-analysis
Single position
13.
Which one of the following █████ ██ ██ ███████ ██ ███ ████ ██
a
the reasoning leading ██ █ ███████ ████████ ███████ ███████
“Real reasoning” doesn’t refer to reasoning leading to a decision against recusal. It refers to the judge’s true reasoning underlying a judgment, which might not be contained in the written explanation of her reasons. We know this because when P4 begins with a reference to “the reasoning,” it refers to the last sentence of P3, which refers to the “legal reasoning on the basis of which [the judge’s] ultimate judgments were made.” This reasoning isn’t about why the judge didn’t recuse; it’s about they the judge decided the case the way she did.
b
an argument that ██ ███ █████████ ██ ██ ██████████ ██ ███████ ███████ ██████ █████ ████████
“Real reasoning” doesn’t refer to reasoning that’s too technical. It refers to reasoning that might be the judge’s true line of reasoning but isn’t part of the judge’s written explanation.
c
reasoning that is █████████ ██ ███ ███████ ████████ ██████ ███████ █ █████████
This is an example of the kind of “real reasoning” described. The judge’s written explanation might not disclose the judge’s personal animus against the defendant; but this personal animus could be what in fact motivates the judge and so is part of the judge’s “real reasoning” for deciding the way she did. This is how “undetected bias” might exist even if the judge is required to write an explanation of her reasoning.
d
reasoning that a █████████████ ████████ ██████ ████ ███ █████ ████
“Real reasoning” in context refers to the judge’s true reasoning for a decision, as opposed to the reasoning they might include in a written explanation. (D) describes what might be contained in a judge’s written explanation. But the “real reasoning” might involve bias.
e
a central legal █████████ ████████ ██ ██ █ ███████ ███████ ███████████
“Real reasoning” in context refers to the judge’s true reasoning for a decision, as opposed to the reasoning they might include in a written explanation. The author never suggests a judge’s “real reasoning” is a legal principle. The “real reasoning” is related to the possibility of undetected bias.