ELR Citation: ELR 20125
No(s). 08-22 (U.S. Jun 8, 2009)

The U.S. Supreme Court held that a justice sitting on West Virginia's highest court should have recused himself from a case involving a coal company that contributed large sums of money toward the judge's election campaign. In that case, a jury found the company liable for fraudulent misrepresentation, concealment, and tortious interference with existing contractual relations and awarded petitioners $50 million in damages. Due to the company's involvement with the newly elected justice's campaign, petitioners moved to disqualify him. The justice denied the motion, indicating that he found nothing showing bias for or against any litigant. The court then reversed the $50 million verdict. The Supreme Court ruled that there was a serious, objective risk of actual bias that required the justice's recusal. In an election decided by fewer than 50,000 votes, the justice's campaign contributions—compared to the total amount contributed to the campaign, as well as the total amount spent in the election—had a significant and disproportionate influence on the outcome. The temporal relationship between the campaign contributions, the justice’s election, and the pendency of the case is also critical, for it was reasonably foreseeable that the pending case would be before the newly elected justice. Kennedy, J., delivered the opinion of the Court, in which Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer, JJ., joined. Roberts, C.J., filed a dissenting opinion, in which Scalia, Thomas, and Alito, JJ., joined. Scalia, J., filed a dissenting opinion.