President Donald Trump speaks about Dulles International Airport modernization, in the Oval Office of the White House, Wednesday, July 29, 2026, in Washington (AP Photo/Julia Demaree Nikhinson).
A federal judge in Washington state has categorically rejected a request by the Trump administration to recuse himself from a case involving a recently fired U.S. attorney.
In the underlying case, plaintiff Roger Rogoff is suing to regain his job atop the U.S. Attorney's Office for the Western District of Washington.
A longtime prosecutor based in Seattle, Rogoff was unanimously chosen to lead the office by a panel of district court judges. That atypical selection process only came about due to a longstanding vacancy because President Donald Trump had never filled the role.
Less than an hour after Rogoff was named the head attorney in charge, the 45th and 47th president sent an email and axed the judges' choice.
Rogoff was fired on July 15. His lawsuit was filed on July 21 – and quickly assigned to District Judge Ricardo S. Martinez, a George W. Bush appointee. The next day, however, Martinez reassigned the case.
After Martinez stepped back, the case was assigned to District Judge Stanley A. Bastian, a Barack Obama appointee who serves as both the chief judge of the Eastern District of Washington and the Western District's only current "visiting judge" — a judge who helps with caseload management and idea exchange. In federal judicial jargon, such judges sit and hear cases "by designation and assignment."
This week, Trump asked for a judicial do-over, suggesting the chief judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit should appoint a different judge and directly asking Bastian to recuse himself.
Now, the judge has tersely but firmly declined.
To hear Trump tell it, the fact that Martinez himself participated in the transfer has marred the process because of a 9th Circuit case that says a judicial recusal "must be from a whole proceeding."
When further explaining why Martinez should not have played any role in how the Rogoff case's successor judge was chosen, Trump and the U.S. Department of Justice cited "suspicion" that the disqualified judge might have chosen "a successor whose views are consonant with his," relying on precedent from other circuits.
Bastian seized on those out-of-circuit cases to reject the ask.
"Defendants take issue with the reassignment, asserting that allowing Judge Martinez to recuse himself and reassign the case was somehow improper," Bastian writes in an order denying reassignment or recusal. "Although other districts may have chosen to handle the reassignment in a different manner, there is no binding precedent or rule that states reassignment must follow a certain procedure, and having the assigned judge enter the reassignment order is consistent with Western District of Washington practices."
Trump's recusal request also took Bastian to task for his role as the Western District's "sole visiting judge" and "ongoing caseload" there.
"Perhaps more importantly, the fact that Chief Judge Bastian has long been a visiting member of this District Court should cast doubt on whether he should hear a case about the District Court's choice of U.S. attorney," the government's filing reads, emphasizing how Rogoff was selected by the court itself to serve as U.S. attorney for the district.
Bastian first rubbishes the idea of punishing a visiting judge — pointing out that the government did not cite any cases to support its argument.
"Next, Defendants suggest this Court should recuse itself based on its preexisting and continuing service to the Western District of Washington as a regular visiting judge," the order goes on. "Defendants provide no binding authority that would require recusal, and the Court is unaware of such authority."
The judge then addresses the heart of Trump's complaint.
"This Court has assisted the Western District of Washington in the past in cases where all judges recused themselves, or where necessary to help with docket congestion," the order continues. "Notably, this Court was not involved in the decision to hire Plaintiff, and is not involved in the day-to-day operations of the Western District of Washington."
Bastian cites several statutes to support his continued involvement:
28 U.S.C. § 455 requires federal judges to recuse themselves from a proceeding whenever their impartiality might reasonably be questioned. § 455(a). Moreover, federal judges should recuse themselves if they have a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning the proceeding. § 455(b). On the other hand, in the absence of a legitimate reason to recuse oneself, a judge should participate in cases assigned.
"This Court took an oath to 'administer justice without respect to persons' and to 'faithfully and impartially discharge and perform all duties incumbent upon it' and it intends to fully honor that oath," the order concludes. "The Court will proceed, as always, pursuant to its obligation to treat all parties fairly and to decide all issues fairly and equitably based on the law and facts."
Comments