Excuse me?

Listen to this article

Judges who recuse themselves from cases often seem to take the stance of better safe than sorry.

That’s fine, and I certainly would not want a judge being even subconsciously subjective if I were on trial for murder, or in court to contest a speeding ticket. But the rationale for when a judge steps away from a case also seems to be somewhat subjective.

I have no doubt judges preside over each and every case they feel they can, but the recusal issue grabbed headlines again recently when Milwaukee County Circuit Court Judge John J. DiMotto stepped down from the high-profile sick leave lawsuit

http://www.wislawjournal.com/article.cfm/2009/01/26/

Judge Elsa C. Lamelas was assigned the case, but a substitution request filed by intervening party 9-to-5 ended her involvement before it began. The case then floated to Judge William Sosnay, who in a matter of hours filed his request for recusal.

And a case headed to the state Supreme Court involving former Justice Jon P. Wilcox http://www.jsonline.com/news/wisconsin/38082744.html could give his five former colleagues, who are still on the bench, pause to consider their ability to objectively hear the case.

DiMotto said current events combined with past personal experiences factored into his recusal. Wilcox said he never spoke with his fellow justices about the case coming to court.

The Supreme Court was to hear two petitions, 08-16 (PDF) and 08-25 (PDF) relating to judicial recusal and campaign contributions on April 20, but postponed review of both, likely until after the U.S. Supreme Court rules on a case involving many of the same issues.

Oral argument in the U.S. Supreme Court case, Caperton v A.T. Massey Coal Co., Docket No. 08-22, is scheduled for March 3.

http://www.brennancenter.org/content/resource/caperton_v_massey/

So any review or revisions of recusal standards in Wisconsin, will have to wait.