I always find these rulings to be so ridiculous. They say the judge can be trusted to not be impartial so we don’t need to recuse him. Why does the recusal system exist if judges can be trusted to be impartial about matters they have a personal stake it? The exception eclipses the rule here.
I always find these rulings to be so ridiculous. They say the judge can be trusted to not be impartial so we don’t need to recuse him. Why does the recusal system exist if judges can be trusted to be impartial about matters they have a personal stake it? The exception eclipses the rule here.