Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
8 canonical passages across 5 cases, quoted by 43 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side: they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from United States v. Microsoft Corp..
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | United States v. Microsoft Corp. Anchor | green | “the question is whether a reasonable and informed observer would question the judge's impartiality.” | 9 |
| 2 | In Re Wallace J. Kaminski | green | “a judge should not recuse himself based upon conclusory, unsupported or tenuous allegations.” | 9 |
| 3 | United States v. Microsoft Corp. | green | “deference to the judgments and rulings of courts depends upon public confidence in the integrity and independence of judges.” | 6 |
| 4 | Hurd v. Hodge | green | “we cannot presume that the public policy of the united states manifests a lesser concern for the protection of such basic rights against discriminatory action of federal courts than against such action taken by the courts of the states.” | 4 |
| 5 | Securities & Exchange Commission v. Bilzerian | green | “a judge has as much an obligation not to recuse himself where there is no reason to do so as he does to recuse himself when proper.” | 4 |
| 6 | Tripp v. Executive Office of the President | green | “the moving party must demonstrate the court's reliance on an 'extrajudicial source' that creates an appearance of partiality or, in rare cases, where no extrajudicial source is involved, the movant must show a 'deep-seated favoritism or antagonism that would make fair judgment i…” | 4 |
| 7 | Tripp v. Executive Office of the President | green | “the question is whether a reasonable and informed observer would question the judge's impartiality.” | 4 |
| 8 | Tripp v. Executive Office of the President | green | “deep-seated favoritism or antagonism that would make fair judgment impossible.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment: for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.