Imagine the field day the Republican Party would have had if Hunter Biden had stood trial instead of pleading guilty and a Biden appointee was randomly selected for his trial.
Section 455 of the U.S. Judicial Code mandates recusal (“shall disqualify himself”) if “his impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” Is it “unreasonable” for the public to think that a trial judge’s evidentiary or other rulings might be influenced, even if subconsciously, by a bit of loyalty to the person who appointed her to her most important job (and a job for life)? The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit, or for that matter the Supreme Court, has supervisory responsibility to take Judge Cannon off the case and to do so without requiring a motion by special counsel Jack Smith, who understandably might be reluctant to take that step.
I note that the issue regarding recusal of an appellate judge or justice of the Supreme Court may be distinguishable, because an appeal would resolve only whether the trial judge committed legal error and would not be decided by a single judge.
Christina Sklarew, Bethesda
