No Recusal in Samantha Markle v. Meghan Markle

On this motion, Samantha Markle sues Meghan, the Duchess of Sussex, for defamation and injurious falsehood. She now seeks the undersigned’s disqualification underneath 28 U.S.C. § 455(a)….

Samantha Markle seeks disqualification as a result of President Barack Obama appointed the undersigned to function a federal decide in 2009. She asserts that “there exists an affordable foundation that [the undersigned’s] impartiality can be questioned” as a result of President Obama appointed the undersigned and “the Obama household, Prince Harry, and Meghan are ‘allies’ and robust supporters of each other.” She additionally highlights that the Duchess met privately with First Girl Michelle Obama in 2018 and, in 2020, co-chaired a voter-registration drive with the previous first woman, whom the Duchess referred to as her “pal.”

Along with describing Prince Harry and President Obama as “allies,” Markle asserts that Prince Harry visited the previous president within the White Home, welcomed the previous president and former first woman to Kensington Palace, and performed “an intimate interview” with the previous president. Lastly, she contends that the Duchess and the previous president “share the identical communications staff lead.”

The Movement to Disqualify lacks advantage. Regardless of arguing that members of the general public would entertain a “important doubt” as to the undersigned’s impartiality as a result of “there appears to be an plain connection” between the Obamas and the Duchess, Markle concedes that she “is unaware if [the undersigned] has a present relationship with Obama, and the way far again the connection has existed.” In fact, a legitimate recusal request could not lack factual assist, nor could a celebration premise a recusal request upon unsupported or extremely tenuous hypothesis.

As Markle highlights, President Obama appointed the undersigned almost 13 years in the past. However the undersigned has by no means had any relationship, social or skilled, with the Obamas. The undersigned has by no means spoken with the previous president or the previous first woman. President Obama’s appointment of the undersigned, with out extra, doesn’t function a foundation for recusal. See, e.g., Straw v. United States (Fed. Cir. 2021) (“There isn’t a assist in anyway for the competition {that a} decide may be disqualified primarily based merely on the identification of the President who appointed [her].”); McKee v. U.S. Dep’t of Justice  (D.D.C. 2017) (“[T]he identification of the President who appointed the decide assigned to a case has no bearing on recusal.”). As a result of the undersigned has by no means had any relationship with the Obamas, any relationship, or connection, between the Obamas and the Duchess and Prince Harry doesn’t function a foundation for the undersigned’s recusal. An goal, disinterested, lay observer absolutely knowledgeable of those information wouldn’t entertain important doubt in regards to the undersigned’s impartiality. As such, the Court docket will deny the Movement to Disqualify.

Additional, Markle’s request for recusal is extra attenuated than these circumstances through which presiding district judges declined motions for his or her recusal as a result of the presidents who appointed them had been events to the litigation. See In re Govt Workplace of the President (D.C. Cir. 2000) (denying recusal request underneath § 455(a) and Canon 2 of the Code of Conduct for United States Judges the place the motion “[i]nvolved the conduct of the President who appointed” a presiding circuit courtroom decide); see additionally Trump v. Clinton   (S.D. Fla. 2022) (denying recusal request the place First Girl Hillary Clinton was a defendant and President Invoice Clinton appointed the presiding district decide).