MacNeal v. New York City Commission on Human Rights
- Lorna Schofield
- 1:23-cv-05890
- U.S. District Court · Southern District of New York
- 4
In MacNeal v. New York, Magistrate Judge Willis denied Kelly MacNeal’s request to remove the court from two related cases.
Kelly MacNeal’s request to remove the court from the two related cases was denied; the order did not resolve the underlying claims against the defendants.
What happened
In Kelly MacNeal v. State of New York and the related case against the City of New York, Kelly MacNeal asked the court to remove Judge Schofield because Magistrate Judge Jennifer E. Willis had previously worked for Federal Defenders of New York.
MacNeal argued that statements by that organization about racism showed a conflict with issues in her cases. She also referred to the cases’ theories about discrimination and racism.
Magistrate Judge Willis ruled that her prior work and the organization’s statements did not show personal bias or a reasonable appearance of partiality. Judge Willis denied MacNeal’s request to recuse the court, and the order was filed in both cases.
The detailed version
- MacNeal v. New York City Commission on Human Rights · No. 1:23-cv-05890
- Lorna Schofield
- Feb. 10, 2025
Related Case
The order also concerns Kelly MacNeal v. City of New York et al., No. 23-CV-5890 (LGS) (JW). Judge Lorna Schofield referred the first case to Judge Willis for general pretrial matters and dispositive motions, and referred the related case to Judge Willis for general pretrial matters.
Request for Recusal
MacNeal, who was representing herself, sent a letter asking Judge Schofield to remove the court from both cases. Judge Willis treated the letter as a motion for recusal under 28 U.S.C. § 455. That law requires a judge to step aside when impartiality might reasonably be questioned and also addresses situations involving personal bias, prejudice, or personal knowledge of disputed facts.
MacNeal argued that Judge Willis’s prior position as Director of Strategic Litigation for Federal Defenders of New York created a clear conflict of interest. MacNeal cited statements by the Federal Defenders against racism and argued that the organization’s use of the term “systemic racism” reflected an anti-Caucasian attack related to the racial issues in her case. MacNeal stated that Judge Willis’s race was not the basis of her concern.
Court’s Analysis and Ruling
Judge Willis stated that she had no personal bias or prejudice against any party. She concluded that MacNeal’s interpretation of the Federal Defenders’ statements did not establish such bias. Judge Willis also concluded that her prior work for the Federal Defenders, together with the cases’ theories concerning discrimination or racism, did not create partiality. The court cited decisions holding that a judge’s prior public-service background does not by itself require recusal.
Judge Willis therefore denied MacNeal’s motion to recuse. The Clerk of Court was asked to file the order in both cases. The order addressed recusal and did not decide the underlying claims.
Read the full 4-page opinion on CourtListener, the free public archive maintained by the Free Law Project.