A federal judge in Minnesota declined to step aside from an immigration-related case despite a conflict-of-interest challenge tied to his spouse’s legal work.
The U.S. Department of Justice plans to appeal the judge’s order, which called the government’s motion “improper, untimely, and lacking merit.”
Last week, the DOJ formally moved to disqualify U.S. District Judge Jeffrey Bryan, arguing his impartiality could reasonably be questioned because his wife serves as Minnesota’s solicitor general under Democrat Attorney General Keith Ellison and is leading a separate lawsuit against federal immigration enforcement actions at issue in Bryan’s courtroom.
In its filing, DOJ emphasized that federal law requires recusal when “a judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned,” noting the standard is meant to avoid even “the appearance of partiality” — noting that “public perceptions of partiality can undermine confidence in the courts.”
APPEALS COURT DISMISSES DOJ MISCONDUCT COMPLAINT AGAINST FEDERAL JUDGE
The motion pointed to significant overlap between the habeas case before Bryan and the state’s lawsuit led by his spouse, both of which challenge the legality of Operation Metro Surge, a large-scale federal immigration enforcement effort.
According to the filing, both cases allege that federal agents conducted “warrantless arrests,” engaged in “racial profiling,” and “terrorized, assaulted, and harassed” individuals.
DOJ stressed that the issue is not whether Bryan is personally biased, but whether a reasonable observer could question his neutrality given the circumstances.
“The Court must consider whether the public might reasonably question Judge Bryan’s impartiality,” U.S. Attorney Daniel Rosen’s filing concluded.
The department also noted that Bryan “did not disclose his marriage relationship” to the parties, arguing that disclosure is a prerequisite for any waiver of potential conflicts under federal law.
READ THE ORDER ON MOTION FOR DISQUALIFICATION – APP USERS, CLICK HERE:
Judge Bryan denied the recusal request, allowing himself to remain on the case. The DOJ has indicated it will appeal that decision, setting up a potential higher court review of the recusal standards and their application in politically charged immigration litigation.
The dispute comes amid broader legal battles over Operation Metro Surge, which plaintiffs claim involved unconstitutional enforcement tactics, while federal officials have defended it as a lawful exercise of immigration authority.
Fox News’ David Spunt contributed to this report.
