Consider the following hypothetical: Suppose Supreme Court Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson’s husband happened to be a well-known crypto advocate and an early investor in Sam Bankman-Fried’s crypto exchange FTX. As you may have heard, the exchange collapsed, and SBF was recently convicted of criminal fraud; he intends to appeal. Now suppose that the case ends up before the Supreme Court.

Under those circumstances, is there any question that Justice Jackson would need to recuse herself from the case? After all, her husband could be either a co-conspirator or a victim. Either way, he — and she, by extension — has an interest in the outcome of the prosecution.

Clarence Thomas should recuse himself from reviewing the Justice Department’s prosecution of Donald Trump for trying to overturn the 2020 election, as well as this week’s Colorado state court ruling disqualifying Trump from appearing on the […]