Ohio Supreme Court Justice Refuses to Recuse Himself from Redistricting Lawsuits Involving His Father

By Nikki Slusher

An Ohio Supreme Court Justice has refused to recuse himself from the upcoming pile of lawsuits regarding the states upcoming redistricting. So what’s the problem? Justice Pat DeWine’s father just so happens to currently be Ohio’s Governor, Mike DeWine.

On Thursday, Justice DeWine said he has no intentions of recusing himself from hearing the upcoming trip of lawsuits that will challenge the new state House and Senate districts that DeWine’s father, Gov. DeWine, voted to approve this year.

Justice DeWine has previously recused himself from lawsuits that involved deciding made by his father. As recently as July, DeWine had said he did so to “avoid the appearance of impropriety” when he decided to remove himself from a case that challenged Gov. DeWine’s decision to end the enhanced unemployment benefits from the federal government in Ohio. Back in May, Justice DeWine withdrew from another case that challenged Gov. DeWine’s restrictions related to the ongoing coronavirus pandemic. He cited his father’s “extremely personal involvement” with the situation.

Yet Justice DeWine has defended his position to stay on for the redistricting cases was defended as he said that his father was only one of seven members who approved the the new maps with the rest of the Ohio Redistricting Commission. “He has considerably less influence over the commission than he would over a department of state government,” Justice DeWine said. “Moreover, he is not a member of the legislature and the district lines do not affect him personally. As a consequence, there is no basis for me to recuse myself.”

“Voters elected me to do my job as a Supreme Court Justice. Unless I’m unable to do that job on a specific case due to a conflict of interest, I will continue to do it to the best of my ability,” Justice DeWine continued. He also Addie’s that the redistricting issue for him was “not a close call.” However, not everyone agrees with this viewpoint.

The director of the Center for Professional Ethics at Case Western Reserve University’s law school, Cassandra Burke Robertson, rebutted DeWine’s comments. Robertson emphasized that the state of Ohio’s judicial code of ethics explicitly requires all judges on the bench to recuse themselves from any cases where their close relatives, including parents, are parties or will likely be material witnesses to the court’s proceedings. Furthermore, the ethical standard to which judges are held to also supports recusal from these types of cases as it’s a judge’s duty to remain completely impartial, and if not would possibly bring in reasonable questions over their impartiality.

In the trio of upcoming Ohio redistricting lawsuits Gov. DeWine is listed as a defendant; and at least one of the suit’s’ plaintiffs have stated that they intend to call on all seven members of the ORC which would make Gov. DeWine a witness. State attorneys wrote in submitted court filings that they intend to do so. Since the likelihood of this becoming a reality is high, Robertson believes there isn’t much room for discretion over these cases. She also noted that although voters knew of the father-son relationship between the two when they were elected, this does not “override a non-discretionary requirement.”

Although judicial seats are mostly apolitical — they don’t usually run on party platforms like political candidates — this doesn’t mean politics doesn’t come into play. David Pepper, a lawyer and past Chairman of the OH Democratic Party, called it an “open-and-shut case” on whether Justice DeWine should recuse himself from the upcoming redistricting suits.

Mr. Pepper also said that Pat DeWine’s previous comments expressing his concern over the maps ultimately being found unconstitutional could end up as a key player of evidence that could affect the outcome of these cases. Pepper followed up his stance saying, “He’s a critical witness in the whole thing…This is not a close call. This is decisive.” Both DeWines are Republicans.
The Ohio Supreme Court is planning to listen to three lawsuits challenging the redrawn district maps that Gov. DeWine and other Republicans approved earlier this month. They are scheduled to begin oral arguments in December. One of the suits was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union of OH and two voting rights groups. This suit specifically argues that state Republicans intentionally drew maps to likely award Republicans a largely disproportionate share of the newly gerrymandered legislative districts. The other two additional lawsuits have similar arguments and were filed by Democratic-aligned and progressive groups.

Justice DeWine’s position on the OH Supreme Court and residing over cases involving his Governor father has been a reoccurring issue over the years and helped provide him with longtime prominence in Ohio politics. In 2009 Pat DeWine was elected as the Hamilton County Common Pleas judge, and then elected to the state’s appellate court in 2014. Simultaneously, this overlapped with Mike DeWine’s time as Ohio’s state attorney general from 2011 til 2018; and in November 2019 DeWine took the gubernatorial office which happened to overlap Pat DeWine’s tenure on the bench of the OH Supreme Court which he started in 2017.

In 2018 a panel of three judges dismissed disciplinary complaints against the younger DeWine for refusing to recuse himself from cases involving his father during the elder DeWine’s tenure as state attorney general. In their conclusion, the panel

[si-contact-form form=’2′]