Federal Judge Ryan Nelson disputed allegations he might be impartial, but recused himself from the human rights case out of an “abundance of caution.”

Judge Ryan Nelson of the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals agreed on Thursday to recuse himself from a case challenging the Biden administration’s Gaza policy. As The Intercept reported, Nelson in March was part of a judicial delegation to Israel, which was sponsored by the World Jewish Congress.

The plaintiffs — a mix of Palestinian human rights organizations, Palestinian nationals, and Palestinian Americans — claimed the trip’s ideological framing made it improper for Nelson to participate in the case. Oral argument is scheduled for June 10, and plaintiffs filed an emergency recusal motion on Tuesday.

“Appellants have moved to disqualify me from participation in this case based on my attendance at a judicial education conference in Israel in March,” Nelson wrote in a brief order. He disputed the merit of plaintiffs’ allegations of potential impartiality.

“This case against top U.S. officials for aiding and abetting Israel’s genocide raises issues of utmost importance,” said Baher Azmy, legal director of the Center for Constitutional Rights, which represents the plaintiffs, “and the appearance of fairness is paramount given the stakes.”

  • @fluxionEnglish
    25•5 months ago

    At least he’s more professional about recusing himself than a certain insurrectionist Supreme Court judge

    • @LinkerbaanOP
      1•5 months ago

      As the legal opinions appeared to be divided on this case we can be glad he decided to recuse himself indeed.

      From the other article:

      Peter Joy, who studies legal ethics at Washington University in St. Louis, said it is often difficult to predict how judges will rule on recusal.

      “They make a strong case for the judge to step down,” said Joy. “Here’s somebody who went on a trip, the explicit purpose of which was to try to get Israel’s point of view across.”

      Cassandra Burke Robertson, director of the Center for Professional Ethics at Case Western Reserve University School of Law, did not think it was a clear-cut case for recusal.