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 Vermont, a judge may be disqualified from presiding over a case if there are provable facts that suggest a conflict of interest, which could compromise the judge's impartiality. The Vermont Code of Judicial Conduct provides guidelines for such disqualifications. According to these guidelines, a judge should disqualify themselves in situations where they have previously served as an attorney in the matter, have a personal or fiduciary interest in the outcome, or if a party is related to the judge within the third degree of affinity or consanguinity. The process of a judge stepping down from a case due to potential bias or conflict of interest is known as recusal. While disqualification is not common, it is a critical aspect of ensuring fairness and maintaining public confidence in the judicial system. If a party to a case believes a judge should be disqualified, they can file a motion for the judge's recusal, and the judge will then determine whether to step down from the case.