Recusal is important
in the sense that
it is part of
this big picture notion
that people are entitled
to unbiased adjudicators.
Rob Yablon is a professor
at the UW Law School.
Most judicial recusal
come from a judge
who's already
weighed in on a case
or who has a financial
or personal relationship
with one of the parties.
But that doesn't include
campaign contributions
or statements
from the campaign trail.
The expectation is that
under the current rules
that judges and justices
won't step aside because of
their discussions of issues
or values
on the campaign trail
or because of money
they've received.
Under the
Wisconsin Supreme Court's
own guidelines
each justice decides
for themselves
if they should recuse.
We asked the candidates
in this Supreme Court election
about their recusal standards.
I follow the rules
set by the U.S. Supreme Court
as well as by the
state of Wisconsin.
I've had to look at
different circumstances
and decide when
and how to recuse.
I always look at
not only is it objectively
but subjectively biased
so if there is
an appearance of impropriety
then I will
take a step back.
I'm instructed by my
ethical obligations
to look at each case
on a case-by-case basis
and make sure
that I can be fair
and impartial.
That's what I do
every day.
My strong sense is that
the volume of recusal requests
that we've seen
over the past year or two
are more than
we've ever seen before
in Wisconsin
and the nature
of those requests
really tends to be
quite political.