このエントリーをはてなブックマークに追加
ID 46532
file
title alternative
Due Process Clause of the United States Constitution and Judicial Recusal Reform
creator
Tsuchiya, Takatsugu
NDC
Law
abstract
This paper examines the constitutional development and judicial reform of recusal in the United States. Part 1 focuses on judicial recusal cases of states judges from Tumey v. Ohio(1927) to Caperton v. AT Massey Coal Co.(2009), Williams v. Pennsylvania(2016) and Rippo v. Baker(2017). In these cases Supreme Court insisted that the basic requirement of due process is a fair trial before a fair court, and that Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution may demand judicial recusal where the probability of actual bias on the part of the judge is too high to be constitutionally tolerable. Part 2 makes the argument for reforming the federal law of judicial recusal. First, this article explains the federal recusal standard that was codified at 28 U.S.C.§455. This federal law requires disqualification in any proceeding in which judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questionable. Then it discusses the Congressional impeachment power as special and dramatic means at judicial recusal abuse cases. Really, Senate concluded that district judge Porteous’ recusal conduct constituted an abuse of his judicial office and removed him from office. Finally this paper studies debates at Judicial Transparency and Ethics hearing before the House Judiciary Committee and examines the necessity of federal recusal reform.
journal title
The Hiroshima Law Journal
volume
Volume 42
issue
Issue 1
start page
354
end page
326
date of issued
2018-07-20
publisher
広島大学法学会
issn
0386-5010
ncid
language
jpn
nii type
Departmental Bulletin Paper
HU type
Departmental Bulletin Papers
DCMI type
text
format
application/pdf
text version
publisher
rights
許可なく複製・転載することを禁じる。
department
Graduate School of Social Sciences
他の一覧



Last 12 months's access : ? times
Last 12 months's DL: ? times


This month's access: ? times
This month's DL: ? times