Which statement best describes a judge's obligation when a case involves a close relative?

Which statement best describes a judge's obligation when a case involves a close relative?

• A. Must recuse
• B. May proceed
• C. Only if requested
• D. Never

Answer: (A)

When a judge has a close relative involved in a case, they must recuse themselves. This protects the integrity of the proceedings by avoiding any real or perceived bias. The judge’s impartiality could reasonably be questioned, so stepping aside is the proper, required action to maintain public trust in the judiciary. It isn’t optional, and it isn’t dependent on anyone asking for it; the duty to avoid conflict of interest means a recusal is the correct course. If a judge doesn’t recuse, a party or higher court can challenge the decision on appeal, but the ethical obligation remains clear: disqualify when a close relative is involved.

When a judge has a close relative involved in a case, they must recuse themselves. This protects the integrity of the proceedings by avoiding any real or perceived bias. The judge’s impartiality could reasonably be questioned, so stepping aside is the proper, required action to maintain public trust in the judiciary. It isn’t optional, and it isn’t dependent on anyone asking for it; the duty to avoid conflict of interest means a recusal is the correct course. If a judge doesn’t recuse, a party or higher court can challenge the decision on appeal, but the ethical obligation remains clear: disqualify when a close relative is involved.