Abstract In 21st century Texas, a judge’s decision to recuse from a case is based on a complex set of norms, codes and procedures intended to promote impartiality. For most of the state’s history, however, the sole ground for the removal of a judge from a case was not recusal for bias but disqualification based on rigid conditions set out in the Texas Constitution. This article examines the foundations and emergence of the modern concept of judicial recusal in Texas with the intent to illustrate a shift from rigid constitutional grounds to a more fluid approach based on judicial interpretation of a code of conduct. The author concludes that while Texas disqualification and recusal jurisprudence is conservative and restrained, it remains to be seen whether this restraint can continue unchanged in a post-Caperton era. The Caperton probability of bias standard has become part of the dialogue on recusal and disqualification in Texas, but Caperton-based challenges are unlikely to prevail in the near future because many members of the bench and bar share the belief that the state’s judicial campaign contribution restrictions and recusal jurisprudence create a firewall against violations of the Due Process Clause. The risk, however, is that continued resistance to change may further erode public confidence in existing ethical safeguards and fall short of assuaging concerns that wealthy donors continue to exercise disproportionate influence on the judiciary.

中文翻译：

---

德州司法回避的起源与发展

摘要在21世纪的得克萨斯州，法官决定从案件中撤回判决的依据是旨在促进公正的一系列复杂规范，守则和程序。但是，在该州的大部分历史中，从案件中撤回法官的唯一理由不是因为偏见而退缩，而是根据《德克萨斯州宪法》规定的严格条件而取消资格。本文考察了德克萨斯州现代司法回避概念的基础和出现，旨在说明从僵化的宪法依据向基于行为守则司法解释的更灵活方法的转变。作者得出的结论是，尽管德克萨斯州的失格和回避法理学是保守且受限制的，但在卡佩顿后时代，这种限制能否继续保持不变还有待观察。卡佩顿偏见概率标准已成为德克萨斯州撤销和取消资格的对话的一部分，但是基于卡佩顿的挑战不太可能在不久的将来盛行，因为许多板凳和律师团成员都认为该州的司法竞选捐款限制和回判法学为违反正当程序条款创建了防火墙。然而，风险在于，持续的抗拒变革可能会进一步削弱公众对现有道德保障的信心，并且无法减轻对富裕的捐助者继续对司法机构施加不成比例影响的担忧。但是基于Caperton的挑战不太可能在不久的将来盛行，因为许多法官和律师团都认为，该州的司法竞选捐款限制和撤回的判例会为防止违反正当程序条款创造防火墙。然而，风险在于，持续的抗拒变革可能会进一步削弱公众对现有道德保障的信心，并且无法减轻对富裕的捐助者继续对司法机构施加不成比例影响的担忧。但是基于Caperton的挑战不太可能在不久的将来盛行，因为许多法官和律师团都认为，该州的司法竞选捐款限制和撤回的判例会为防止违反正当程序条款创造防火墙。然而，风险在于，持续的抗拒变革可能会进一步削弱公众对现有道德保障的信心，并且无法减轻对富裕的捐助者继续对司法部门施加不成比例影响的担忧。