Planned Parenthood motion for recusal

Planned Parenthood wants Justice Bill Montgomery to disqualify himself from sitting on an upcoming abortion case.

In this case, the high court will decide if abortion remains legal in Arizona.

To discuss the motion and the importance of addressing bias in the court system, we welcomed Stephen Montoya from Montoya, Lucero, and Pastor.

Planned Parenthood argues Justice Montgomery has made biased comments against the organization in the past.

Montgomery’s past comments include a public statement saying Planned Parenthood is responsible for “the greatest generational genocide known to man.”

“When he was an elected official, he voiced his rather passionate opinions against Planned Parenthood, which many people hold and a majority of the United States Supreme Court somewhat agrees with,” Montoya said.

The comments were made when he was an elected official and not in the court. Montoya wonders whether the justice could set aside his personal opinion and judge the trial fairly.

“I have had professional interactions with him and honestly, I’ve always found him to be fair. I’ve always found him to be a straight shooter. I’ve never thought that he was imposing his personal opinions in any of the decisions he made. I have to say that I would trust him to set aside his personal opinions and do what he believes the law demanded,” Montoya said.

When a justice is sworn in, they are meant to set aside their biases and opinions and judge legal issues. Justice Montgomery has already decided not to recuse himself from the case. He has already concluded that he can set aside his opinions and judge the trial fairly.

Typically, a justice is the only one who can decide when to recuse themselves from a case. However, if a justice has any financial interest in the case or a relative is involved they must recuse themselves.

“In reference to personal opinions, which we all have, if you force a judge to recuse themselves in such a situation you could have an empty court,” Montoya said.