A judge may be disqualified from hearing or presiding over a matter in which provable facts suggest the judge has a disqualifying conflict of interest. The related legal process of recusal of a judge is generally based on the perception of impartiality due to circumstances that suggest a conflict of interest—but not to the same degree as the facts that establish disqualification.

The standards for disqualification of a judge vary from state to state, and disqualification is rare. But a judge is generally disqualified in any proceeding in which:

(1) the judge has served as a lawyer in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom the judge previously practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter;

(2) the judge knows that, individually or as a fiduciary, the judge has an interest in the subject matter in controversy; or

(3) either of the parties may be related to the judge by affinity or consanguinity within the third degree.

In Oregon, a judge may be disqualified from presiding over a case if there are provable facts that suggest a conflict of interest that could affect the judge's impartiality. According to Oregon law, a judge is typically disqualified from a proceeding if: (1) the judge has previously served as a lawyer in the matter in controversy, or if a lawyer with whom the judge had previously practiced law served as a lawyer concerning the matter during their association; (2) the judge has a personal or fiduciary interest in the subject matter of the controversy; or (3) a party to the proceeding is related to the judge by blood or marriage within the third degree. The process for a judge's recusal in Oregon involves the judge stepping aside from the case voluntarily or being removed following a motion from a party to the case. The standards for disqualification are designed to uphold the integrity of the judicial process by ensuring that judges are impartial and that justice is administered fairly.