A motion has been filed requesting the immediate recusal of Rep. Jason Nemes from chairing, or even being a member of, the House impeachment committee.
The petition notes that Nemes should be disqualified from service the same as any judge or prosecutor would be if they had shown bias against a defendant, or if they had a previous relationship with the persons before them. The petition states “This Motion, filed with the House Clerk, raises grave issues as to Nemes’ bias and conflicts of interest. When such a challenge has been filed, the judge is without jurisdiction to proceed further in the matter until a final ruling on any bias, prejudice or impropriety is determined. This House should adhere to the same fair and equitable procedures. Jason Nemes should immediately step down from the Committee while the allegations are investigated by an untainted Impeachment Committee.”
The recusal petition contains the following “relevant facts” supporting its request for recusal.
The relationship between Nemes and AG Daniel Cameron, one of the impeachment defendants
The petition lists multiple instances of Nemes calling Cameron a friend, and of Nemes support for Cameron. These include an ad Nemes made for Cameron’s campaign, a Facebook post where Nemes calls Cameron “my friend,” and says that Cameron will “follow the law.” Since the Cameron impeachment specifically says that Cameron did not, in fact, follow the law, Nemes cannot be impartial as to whether Cameron did.
Incitement of violence
From the motion: “Jason Nemes has made false public statements calculated to foment and incite violence against medical workers, County Health Departments and their employees, and the Kentucky Public Health Commissioner, Dr. Steven Stack. … In particular, Nemes has falsely stated in a television interview that the Governor, and those acting upon his authority, have deprived Kentucky’s citizens of their legal and Constitutional rights:
‘I think he has went too far [sic] … He was found to have violated the law a number of times, our Constitutional rights, as courts have found. I think he went too far.’
“This outburst by Jason Nemes constitutes a removable offense whether Nemes is considered a judge or a prosecutor in this impeachment matter. Any prosecutor or other public official responsible for the fair administration of justice is barred from openly attacking the supposed subject of an “impartial” investigation. Prosecutors are routinely censured by the Kentucky Supreme Court for exactly this conduct.”
The relationship between Nemes and Robert Goforth, another subject of an impeachment petition
Nemes and Rep. Robert Goforth are co-sponsors of House Bill 1, the bill attacking the governor’s efforts to fight the pandemic, and House Bill 36, which opposes requiring COVID vaccinations. The motion notes, “As the impeachment matter regarding Rep. Goforth is also before the Committee, and Goforth and Nemes have partnered on bills attacking the Governor’s actions, this relationship is also fair reason to impute bias by Nemes towards one side of the issues in various pleadings before this Committee.”
The relationship between Nemes and the petitioners in the Beshear impeachment
Three of the four petitioners in the Beshear impeachment petition were Facebook friends with Jason Nemes on Facebook. One still is, but the other two removed their friend connection after the petition was filed. And, petitioner Tony Wheatley is a Facebook friend of Rep. Mike Nemes, Jason’s father and also a member of the House.
The recusal motion notes these relationships, and that Nemes has “privately and publicly discussed and encouraged multiple attacks on the Governor’s Executive Orders and other safety measures and discussed how particular Executive Branch actions could be challenged legally and otherwise.” In another section of the motion, it notes
“While the record is not yet clear on whether Rep. Nemes guided the Petitioners to file an impeachment action against Governor Beshear, the petitioners were certainly friends or acquaintances of Rep. Nemes; the Petition is clearly not written by a layperson; and the petition contains reference to the same arguments and language used by Rep. Nemes to disparage the Governor’s life-saving efforts. If Rep. Nemes’s past actions and decisions contributed to the filing of this matter, recusal is mandatory.”
Conclusion
The recusal motion notes that even if Nemes portrays himself more as a prosecutor than a judge, the same principles apply. It quotes Kentucky law as saying recusal is proper in any case where “the facts alleged would place a reasonably prudent person in fear of not receiving a fair and impartial trial.”
The motion concludes,
“For the foregoing reasons, Rep. Jason Nemes must immediately voluntarily recuse himself from the Impeachment Committee. If he refuses to do so, the Committee must require him to step down from his position and not participate in any meetings or discussions involving impeachment until such time as the Body can make a full review and determination of the issues raised herein.”
–30–
Resources