This is a really interesting analysis. Clearly there’s no crisp language that would force her to. It seems like it would be surprising if they don’t at least ask her to; yes there’s a risk of making her hostile, but (a) it seems like she’s going to be hostile to the prosecution anyway and (b) the risk of her dismissing the case before it goes to jury is just too great.
I guess we’ll see.
Ken White at Popehat disagrees with this analysis: https://popehat.substack.com/p/thats-not-how-recusal-works-thats?ICID=ref_fark
Thanks for this, good read. It seems to be a clash of comprehension between a layperson (what does a reasonable question of impartiality look like) and the judiciary (We’re emotionless machines who are capable of cordoning off sections of our brain, how dare you intimate we can be biased). Seems its the judiciary making the call on this one.