Former President Trump on Monday formally demanded the recusal of the federal judge overseeing his 2020 election subversion case in Washington, D.C.
Trump’s attorneys cited statements U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan made while sentencing two previous Jan. 6 defendants that appeared to reference Trump, arguing the comments create a perception that Chutkan prejudged Trump’s guilt before he was charged.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Former President Trump on Monday formally demanded the recusal of the federal judge overseeing his 2020 election subversion case in Washington, D.C.
“Although Judge Chutkan may genuinely intend to give President Trump a fair trial — and may believe that she can do so — her public statements unavoidably taint these proceedings, regardless of outcome.”
In October 2022, Chutkan chided Ohio Jan. 6 defendant Christine Priola during her sentencing that she and other rioters offered “blind loyalty to one person who, by the way, remains free to this day,” according to a hearing transcript.
Trump has publicly criticized Chutkan before, claiming she “obviously wants me behind bars,” and is “very biased and unfair.” He has also speculated that there is “no way” he will receive a fair trial under the federal judge and previewed he would file the recusal motion.
“Public statements of this sort create a perception of prejudgment incompatible with our justice system,” Trump’s attorneys wrote.
“In a case this widely watched, of such monumental significance, the public must have the utmost confidence that the Court will administer justice neutrally and dispassionately.
The original article contains 537 words, the summary contains 183 words. Saved 66%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!
I mean, it sounds like he has a point? Perhaps another judge should sentence him to prison instead, just so they don’t have grounds for an appeal on this.
The issue is all Judges from the available pool have heard Jan 6 cases and Chutkin is one of the “nicest” of the bunch.
So far trump’s lawyers have thrown a lot of meritless shit at the walls and hoped it would delay the process and maybe something sticks.
This statement by the judge seems mostly innocuous, but it may actually give them a little crack of daylight
I’m keen to hear about this on Opening Arguments podcast tomorrow. They’ve been doing great work tracking and explaining every legal filing.