Michigan Court Rule 2.003 concerns the disqualification of a judicial officer and applies to Michigan Supreme Court Justices.
Subparagraph(C) outlines the grounds for when a judicial officer may not be able to preside over a matter.
(C) Grounds.
(1) Disqualification of a judge is warranted for reasons that include, but are not limited to, the following:
(a) The judge is biased or prejudiced for or against a party or attorney.
(b) The judge, based on objective and reasonable perceptions, has either (i) a serious risk of actual bias impacting the due process rights of a party as enunciated in Caperton v Massey, 556 US 868; 129 S Ct 2252; 173 L Ed 2d 1208 (2009), or (ii) has failed to adhere to the appearance of impropriety standard set forth in Canon 2 of the Michigan Code of Judicial Conduct.
(c) The judge has personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding.
(d) The judge has been consulted or employed as an attorney in the matter in controversy.
(e) The judge was a partner of a party, attorney for a party, or a member of a law firm representing a party within the preceding two years.
(f) The judge knows that he or she, individually or as a fiduciary, or the judge’s spouse, parent or child wherever residing, or any other member of the judge’s family residing in the judge’s household, has more than a de minimis economic interest in the subject matter in controversy that could be substantially impacted by the proceeding.
(g) The judge or the judge’s spouse, or a person within the third degree of relationship to either of them, or the spouse of such a person:(i) is a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, or trustee of a party;(ii) is acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;(iii) is known by the judge to have a more than de minimis interest that could be substantially affected by the proceeding;(iv) is to the judge’s knowledge likely to be a material witness in the proceeding.
(2) Disqualification not warranted.
(a) A judge is not disqualified merely because the judge’s former law clerk is an attorney of record for a party in an action that is before the judge or is associated with a law firm representing a party in an action that is before the judge.
(b) A judge is not disqualified based solely upon campaign speech protected by Republican Party of Minn v White, 536 US 765 (2002), so long as such speech does not demonstrate bias or prejudice or an appearance of bias or prejudice for or against a party or an attorney involved in the action.
The accompanying table summarizes the times when justices have voluntarily opted not to participate in cases during the 2023-24 term (at least through July 5, 2024).
Without fanfare or controversy but in normal due course, these practices promote public confidence.