Judge Cannon refuses to recuse self from case of man accused of trying to shoot Trump
U.S. District Judge Aileen Cannon declined to recuse herself from the case involving Donald Trump's would-be assassin Ryan Routh.
The 58-year-old Routh's attorneys asked the Florida-based federal judge to recuse herself because she had been appointed by the alleged target of the assassination attempt and cited her controversial ruling in favor of Trump in civil and criminal cases — including the dismissal of his felony charges in the Mar-a-Lago classified documents case.
"To the extent this case can even be said to qualify as a 'same or related' case as compared to the cited cases involving former President Trump — a strained assumption to begin with — the Motion presents no facts or law warranting a departure from the general rule of no recusal, much less the 'pervasive bias and prejudice' necessary to trigger the exception to the general rule," Cannon wrote in her ruling.
"Upon a full review of the Motion, the specific factual circumstances presented, and the applicable law, I see no valid basis for recusal," she concluded. "The Motion is accordingly denied."
ALSO READ: Not all former Trump 'spiritual advisors' appear in public to support his 2024 campaign
Routh's motion referred to the former president's public praise for the judge's rulings in his favor and public speculation about the nature of her appointment to three cases involving him, as well as the possibility that Trump might reward her with an appointment to a higher court if he was re-elected – all of which Cannon peevishly rejected.
"A judge should not recuse herself based on 'highly tenuous speculation' or operate on 'rumors' and 'innuendos' in publicized cases," Cannon wrote. "Stripped of such speculation, the Motion fails to cite any objective facts warranting a reasonable inference of partiality or bias under applicable legal principles."
"Recusal is an objective inquiry from the perspective of a 'reasonable observer who is informed of all the surrounding facts and circumstances,'" she added. "This case, like the prior cited cases involving former President Trump, were randomly assigned to me through the Clerk’s random case assignment system. Period. I will not be guided by highly inaccurate, uninformed, or speculative opinions to the contrary."