Sign Petition

Amending the Recusal Law (28 U.S.C. Sec. 455)

932 Signatures Goal: 2,000

This petition is a response to the conduct of a federal judge who taught at a university, was a board member of one of its research centers, received $5,500 to teach a summer course at a resort location in Greece, and presided over a series of lawsuits against that same university during the same period while never disclosing her association with it. When confronted with this conflict of interest, this judge refused to withdraw despite the canons of judicial conduct that indicate disqualification, and despite the recusal statute whose general language was ignored. Throughout the country, judges associated with universities are called upon to adjudicate cases in which those universities are defendants in lawsuits.

This petition adds specific language to the recusal statute that will compel judges to withdraw from lawsuits in which their university employers are a party. It supports the incorporation of Sec. 455(b)(5)(v) into the United States Code, Title 28, Section 455(b), which adds the following phrase to the existing recusal statute: "Serves as an instructor or on an advisory board of an educational institution that is a party to the proceeding."

For a full description of this petition, see: http://www.tulanelink.com/tulanelink/petition_13a.htm

Links


1

Highlight

November 28
As signer of this petition, you join with others who believe that amendment of the Recusal Law (28 USC Sec. 455) brings us one step closer to the goal of "Equal Justice Under Law," a right promised by our Constitution but imperiled through the abuse of judicial discretion and the lack of public vigilance. See: http://www.tulanelink.com/tulanelink/petition_13a.htm
  • Stephanie Malouff`
    Stephanie Malouff` United States, Albuquerque
    Jul 08, 2015
    Jul 08, 2015
    Judge Berrigan should not be censured, she should be removed from the bench and disbarred. She should not be a trier of fact or an attorney. She abused her discretion, committed fraud upon the court, judicial misconduct, and denied the rights of a litigant protected under U.S. Const. amend. V and U.S. Const. amend. VII.
  • CathyBryant
    Apr 16, 2015
    Apr 16, 2015
    May the Spirits assist us ALL "
  • CathyBryant
    CathyBryant United States, Baltimore
    Apr 16, 2015
    Apr 16, 2015
    May the Spirits assist us ALL "
  • Ernesto Frank Ahumada
    Ernesto Frank Ahumada United States, Baton Rouge
    Apr 07, 2015
    Apr 07, 2015
    I am currently having this same problem with Mr. Farrugia and no other Attorney is willing to help me. I've tried the board of law firms , everyone and no one will help they all say I have a good case against him. WHY is this
See More
860

Signatures

  • 4 weeks ago
    Stephanie Malouff` United States
    4 weeks ago
  • 2 months ago
    Clara Abbas United States
    2 months ago
  • 4 months ago
    CathyBryant
    4 months ago
  • 4 months ago
    L Kellermann
    4 months ago
  • 4 months ago
    Matthew Name United States
    4 months ago
  • 4 months ago
    Maryland Family Law Reform
    4 months ago
  • 4 months ago
    Ernesto Frank Ahumada
    4 months ago
  • 5 months ago
    Richard Benavides
    5 months ago
  • 5 months ago
    John Haeger
    5 months ago
  • 5 months ago
    Kacy Christopher
    5 months ago
  • 7 months ago
    James A LaCoste
    7 months ago
  • 9 months ago
    Chris Hart
    9 months ago
  • 9 months ago
    DR. NELSON ROCHET
    9 months ago
  • 10 months ago
    ronnie lozano
    10 months ago
  • 11 months ago
    melissa walker
    11 months ago
See More