Last week Judge Maryann Sumi, one of the most liberal judges in one of the most liberal counties (Dane) issued a temporary restraining order blocking the implementation of the recently passed collective bargaining bill.

Considering Sumi’s son is Jake Sinderbrand,a former field manager for the AFL-CIO and a data manager for the SEIU State Council.  Today he runs Left Field Strategies, a firm that runs political campaigns.  Judge Sumi should have recused herself in this case. A judge must disqualify herself whenever she has a personal bias towards either party in the case. Considering unions employ her son, Judge Sumi has a vested interest in maintaining the union status quo.

The applicable standard when deciding to recuse oneself is whether an average person would think the judge would be biased. In this case, it’s clear that an average person could see the potential for bias. If a judge, like Judge Sumi, refuses to recuse herself she may be subject to sanctions. Additionally, if an appellate court finds a judgment rendered when the judge in question should have been recused, it may set aside the judgment and return the case for retrial.

Before this decision, Judge Sumi already created controversy in the Budget Repair Bill saga when she refused to issue an order forcing striking teachers back to work instead of continuing to spend their work day protesting at the capital.

Today Attorney General J.B. Van Hollen asked the appellate court to set aside the temporary restraining order. The Justice Department said that the Legislature’s own rules trump notice requirements in the open meetings law. One expects they could also call into question Sumi’s conflict of interest if need be.