’s recusal, the federal judge overseeing the election interference case in Washington can now decide whether she’ll step aside. But the argument advanced by the former president’s legal team shows she doesn’t have to.
The distinction matters because if the sources were intrajudicial, then Trump faces a higher bar for recusal — he would need to show a deep-seated animosity on Chutkan’s part, which he probably can’t do. It’s true that Chutkan probably consumes news and is otherwise exposed to information outside of court. But it’s not true that the prosecution didn’t point to any intrajudicial sources for her statements.to which Trump just responded had noted that he took Chutkan’s comments out of context — the context being that Chutkan, like other Washington judges, had presided over multiple Jan.