A question for those here with federal court experience: was it appropriate for the judge to

[Atticus]

announce---after Trump requested the appointment of a Special Master, but before a hearing had even been scheduled---that she was "preliminarily inclined" to make the requested appointment?

Does this announcement not amount to admitting bias?

If you were the DOJ attorney opposing the appointment of the Special Master, would you feel confident th his judge would fairly consider your arguments?

[getagrip_already]

1. or...

Was it appropriate for the case to proceed without proper notice being served to the defendent?

Was it appropriate to grab jurisdiction from a lower court already hearing the case without a request from that court, and when the actual appropriate court would have been in DC?

Was it appropriate to ignore existing precedant that EP cases do not exist with respect to classified information/defense secrets?

Just askin.

[Effete Snob]

2. Not as unusual as you might think

I’ve seen plenty of motion hearings where the judge says, if they have an initial impression, which way they are leaning and one what points specifically they would like to hear argument that might change their mind.

It’s not at all inappropriate. Certainly if you thought you walked in with a slam dunk case, it will motivate you to be more persuasive than you otherwise might have been.

[MaryMagdaline]

4. I agree. Although I've had much more State court experience than federal, several judges will tell

us which way they are leaning and it’s a wake up call to hit them with your best work so as not to take the motion too lightly.
However just because some good and rational judges will tell us which way they are leaning doesn’t mean that this judge is acting in good faith.

[Effete Snob]

5. There's also the ones who go harder on the side that is probably going to win

As you know, there are some judges who, for whatever reason, grill the crap out of the side for which they eventually rule, just to make them work for it.

This particular motion is a little bizarre in the first place though, and if the judge is going to rule in favor of the DoJ, she's going to do it on a record that will be unassailable on appeal. On the other hand, she may not be too bright. I don't know her particular background, record or reputation.

[MaryMagdaline]

6. Yes

[Ponietz]

3. I practiced in state court

On edit, I’ll put it this way: there is no reason other than a political one to make such a statement. The DOJ says venue is inappropriate. That’s all I need to know. It would be as if the Supreme Court intentionally leaked the copy of Dobbs weeks before the opinion was formally issued.

Judges will indicate their inclinations in informal settings. This seems to me to have been a political act and I am not at all confident in this judge.
This attorney agrees:

Link to tweet