Samantha Markle ran into some tough luck recently in a lawsuit she’s filed against her sister Meghan. Meghan, you may recall, is the Duchess of Sussex, and the wife of Prince Harry.

In March of this year, Samantha filed a defamation suit against Meghan, alleging that statements Meghan provided to the authors of the book Finding Freedom and in an interview with Oprah Winfrey defamed Samantha. These statements were to the effect that Meghan had had no relationship with Samantha growing up, and that Samantha cashed in on Meghan’s fame by, among other things, changing her name back to Markle.

Samantha filed suit in a federal court in Tampa. The complaint seeks compensatory and punitive damages against Meghan, although the complaint does not specify an actual amount of damages.

The case was randomly assigned to Judge Charlene Edwards Honeywell. President Barack Obama nominated Judge Honeywell to the federal bench in 2009. And that caused Samantha’s antennae to go up immediately. She filed a motion under Federal Statute 28 USC § 455 asking Judge Honeywell to recuse herself.

Samantha’s reasoning was a little hard to follow. She contended, “the Obama family, Prince Harry, and Meghan are ‘allies’ and strong supporters of one another.” She provided the court with some details to back up this claim. Meghan met privately with First Lady Michelle Obama in 2018 and, in 2020, co-chaired a voter-registration drive with the former first lady, whom Meghan called her “friend.”

Samantha also pointed to the facts that Prince Harry visited the former president in the White House, welcomed the former president and former first lady to Kensington Palace, and conducted “an intimate interview” with the former president. Samantha also noted that Meghan and Barack Obama share the same communications team lead.

To prevail on a § 455 motion, the moving party must demonstrate that a reasonable, objective observer would entertain serious doubts about the judge’s impartiality. Samantha argued that Meghan had a relationship with the Obamas, President Obama appointed Judge Honeywell to the federal bench, and therefore Judge Honeywell couldn’t be impartial.

Judge Honeywell didn’t agree. As she noted, although President Obama nominated her in 2009, she has never had any relationship with the Obamas, social or professional. Indeed, she has never met them. As the Judge noted, the mere fact that President Obama appointed her, without more, doesn’t justify recusal.

I have always been of the mind that one should not suggest to a judge that they aren't impartial unless there is some pretty solid evidence backing up that assertion. Samantha didn’t have any evidence but she filed the motion anyway. Not a great first impression.

Jack Greiner is a partner at the Graydon law firm in Cincinnati. He represents Enquirer Media in First Amendment and media issues

This article originally appeared on Cincinnati Enquirer: No luck for Samantha Markle