Judge Ross Recuses From Election Interference Case

On May 29, DOJ asked Judge Ross to recuse in United States v. Raffensperger, a suit to obtain Georgia election records. The motion sat on the docket for more than two weeks. On June 15, DOJ filed a notice of intent to file a petition for a writ of mandamus. That motion apparently got Judge Ross’s attention. This morning, she recused from the case.

Judge Ross doesn’t quite admit that she is the subject judge. She only presents facts as stated by the United States.

Based on media accounts, the United States asserts that the undersigned attended an event likely hosted by Fani Willis, the now former Fulton County District Attorney. [Doc. 112 at 6]. According to the United States, considering Willis’s affiliation with the Democratic Party and her role in prosecuting President Donald J. Trump for election fraud, the undersigned’s attendance at an event hosted by the Willis campaign creates an appearance of bias in this proceeding. [Id. at 6–7].

At this point, who is Judge Ross kidding?

To Judge Ross’s credit, she does the right thing and steps aside based on her relationship with Fani Willis:

Nevertheless, the Court finds that recusal is appropriate based on the unique facts of this case. Specifically, this case concerns the Trump administration’s efforts to obtain Georgia’s unredacted voter registration list in furtherance of the administration’s objective to uphold election integrity in Georgia, and Willis is known for her role in the prosecution of President Trump over his alleged interference in Georgia’s elections. Both the Trump administration’s present and Willis’s past efforts have become heavily polarized. Thus, the Court cannot discount the potential that the undersigned’s attendance at an event sponsored by Willis’s campaign, even if that attendance was “only for the purpose of reuniting with former colleagues[,]” Judicial Council Report at 17, would lead an objective observer to perceive that the undersigned supports Willis’s position. And perceived support of Willis’s position on election integrity could cause an objective observer to significantly doubt the undersigned’s impartiality in this case. Therefore, out of an abundance of caution for the potential perception of bias, the undersigned will disqualify herself from further proceedings in this case.

I will assume for present purposes that Judge Ross actually read this order before signing it. This order further suggests Judge Ross has no intent to resign. Impeachment is the only path forward.