Last week, we published “Conflict U.,” a report that identified 24 federal judges who did not recuse in cases involving the universities where they serve as law school adjuncts.

In time, we’ll be updating the report with additional judges we identify who fit the criteria, but for now, we want to add the following points.

1. You know that then-Judge Barrett included both Notre Dame University and Notre Dame Law School on her 2020 recusal list.

Turns out she cited both entities as conflicts on a second piece of SCOTUS nomination paperwork (pp. 63-64).

Here’s her answer to Q24 on potential conflicts of interest:

Identify the family members or other persons, parties, categories of litigation, and financial arrangements that are likely to present potential conflicts-of-interest when you first assume the position to which you have been nominated. Explain how you would address any such conflict if it were to arise.

“If confirmed, I will continue my present practice of using a recusal list to identify and avoid potential conflicts as described in response to Question 14. This list includes, but is not limited to, cases where Jesse Barrett, my husband and a practicing attorney, or Amanda Coney Williams, my sister and a practicing attorney, participated in any stage of the proceedings. This list also includes cases where Notre Dame University or affiliated entities (including, but not limited to, Notre Dame Law School) were a party. Finally, would also recuse myself from matters in which I participated while a judge on the court of appeals.”

2. Though the report is a finished product in some ways, and one we stand behind, it’s also a jumping off point for others to do research on the topic. In other words, once we identified this problem, we challenged ourselves to find 25 judges who failed to recuse despite their university conflict in the last six years. We found 25 without too much trouble, though that went down to 24 when one of the conflict judges recused in a case a few weeks ago.

On Tuesday, Colorado Politics came out with a story identifying two more federal judges who teach at a law school, the University of Colorado Law School, but who aren’t recusing in cases involving the parent university, UC Boulder.

As Michael Karlik, the CP reporter, put it, “Colorado Politics’ independent docket review determined that […] U.S. Magistrate Judge Timothy P. O’Hara and U.S. District Court Judge Daniel D. Domenico [also] taught at least one course at Colorado Law. At the same time, they had cases pending before them in which CU itself, its board of regents, another of its schools or its medical authority was a defendant in a civil case.”

That’s great work and something we hope others will replicate.