Sweep of recusal ruling unclear

One former judge concludes Caperton has set a critical but limited principle.

, The National Law Journal

The U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Caperton v. Massey Coal Company has already been given a range of interpretations by commentators. By a 5-4 vote, the Court said the constitutional right to due process can sometimes require an elected judge to recuse in a case involving a campaign benefactor. To sort out the meaning and implications of the Caperton ruling, Tony Mauro spoke with former Texas Chief Justice Thomas Phillips.

This content has been archived. It is available exclusively through our partner LexisNexis®.

To view this content, please continue to Lexis Advance®.

Continue to Lexis Advance®

Not a Lexis Advance® Subscriber? Subscribe Now

Why am I seeing this?

LexisNexis® is now the exclusive third party online distributor of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® customers will be able to access and use ALM's content by subscribing to the LexisNexis® services via Lexis Advance®. This includes content from the National Law Journal®, The American Lawyer®, Law Technology News®, The New York Law Journal® and Corporate Counsel®, as well as ALM's other newspapers, directories, legal treatises, published and unpublished court opinions, and other sources of legal information.

ALM's content plays a significant role in your work and research, and now through this alliance LexisNexis® will bring you access to an even more comprehensive collection of legal content.

For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at customercare@alm.com