{"id":284901,"date":"2025-06-10T03:00:40","date_gmt":"2025-06-10T03:00:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/peraltafinancing.com\/uncategorized\/risk-reading-judicial-disqualification-exception-aml-news-and-views\/"},"modified":"2025-06-10T03:00:40","modified_gmt":"2025-06-10T03:00:40","slug":"risk-reading-judicial-disqualification-exception-aml-news-and-views","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901","title":{"rendered":"Risk Reading \u2014 Judicial Disqualification Exception, AML News and Views"},"content":{"rendered":"<p> <br \/>\n<\/p>\n<div id=\"post-9320\">\n<p>\t<!-- .entry-header --><\/p>\n<div class=\"entry-content\">\n<p><img fetchpriority=\"high\" decoding=\"async\" class=\"aligncenter size-full wp-image-419\" src=\"https:\/\/bresslerriskblog.com\/wp_bresslerriskblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/05\/2019_judge.jpg\" alt=\"\" width=\"480\" height=\"273\" srcset=\"https:\/\/bresslerriskblog.com\/wp_bresslerriskblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/05\/2019_judge.jpg 480w, https:\/\/bresslerriskblog.com\/wp_bresslerriskblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/05\/2019_judge-300x171.jpg 300w, https:\/\/bresslerriskblog.com\/wp_bresslerriskblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/05\/2019_judge-230x131.jpg 230w, https:\/\/bresslerriskblog.com\/wp_bresslerriskblog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/05\/2019_judge-350x199.jpg 350w\" sizes=\"(max-width: 480px) 100vw, 480px\"\/><\/p>\n<p>New York Judicial Ethics Opinion 25-01: \u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.law.com\/newyorklawjournal\/2025\/05\/29\/judicial-ethics-opinion-25-01\/?slreturn=20250530183756\"><strong>A judge need not disqualify in matters involving the judge\u2019s former election opponent, provided the judge can be fair and impartial<\/strong><\/a>\u201d \u2014<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>\u201cDigest: A judge need not disqualify in matters involving the judge\u2019s former election opponent, provided the judge can be fair and impartial.\u201d<br \/>Rules: Judiciary Law \u00a7 14; 22 NYCRR 100.2; 100.2(A); 100.3(E)(1); Opinions 19-78; 90-136; People v. Moreno, 70 NY2d 403 (1987).\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cOpinion: The inquiring judge was opposed during his\/her recent election campaign by a practicing attorney who may appear before the judge in the future. The judge describes the campaign as uneventful, without \u2018debates or any acrimonious interactions.\u2019 The judge asks if he\/she must disqualify when the former election opponent appears.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cA judge must always avoid even the appearance of impropriety and act to promote public confidence in the judiciary\u2019s integrity and impartiality (see 22 NYCRR 100.2; 100.2[A]). A judge must disqualify in any proceeding where the judge\u2019s impartiality \u2018might reasonably be questioned,\u2019 including where required by rule or law (22 NYCRR 100.3[E][1]; Judiciary Law \u00a7 14). Where disqualification is not mandatory, however, the judge is the sole arbiter of recusal, a discretionary decision within the personal conscience of the court (see People v. Moreno, 70 NY2d 403, 405 [1987]).\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cA judge need not disqualify merely because an attorney appearing before the judge on behalf of a client is the judge\u2019s former election opponent (see Opinions 19-78; 90-136). As we explained in Opinion 90-136:\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cWhether the judge\u2019s impartiality might reasonably be questioned in this case depends on the facts and circumstances, including the time elapsed, the bitterness of the campaign, and the personal quality of the campaign. This Committee is not in a position to pass on such factual issues and the judge must decide for himself or herself whether his or her impartiality might reasonably be questioned. Of course, if the judge doubts his or her ability to be impartial, the judge must disqualify himself or herself.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cIndeed, considering these factors, we have advised that a former opponent\u2019s legal challenge to the judge\u2019s nominating petition does not, by itself, mandate disqualification (see Opinion 19-78). We reasoned that the filing of litigation challenging nominating petitions is a \u2018common circumstance in contested election campaigns\u2019 that does not by itself establish a level of \u2018bitterness\u2019 mandating disqualification (id.).\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cHere, as the judge indicates the campaign was neither controversial nor acrimonious, the judge need not disqualify in matters involving the judge\u2019s former election opponent, provided the judge can be fair and impartial.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>\u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.nortonrosefulbright.com\/en\/knowledge\/publications\/9c9b28cb\/consultation-into-the-second-exposure-draft-of-the-anti-money-laundering-and-counter-terrorism-rules#section1\"><strong>Consultation into the second exposure draft of the [Australian] Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Rules<\/strong><\/a>\u201d \u2014<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>\u201cThe Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre (AUSTRAC) has initiated consultation (Consultation) on its second exposure draft of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Rules 2025 (Cth) (Draft Rules) and the AML\/CTF (Class Exemptions and Other Matters) Rules 2007 (Cth) (Class Exemption Rules). These Rules, read with the amended Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (Cth) (Act), will implement the most transformational changes to the anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing (AML\/CTF) framework since the Act commenced in 2006.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cThese changes under the Act and Rules will apply to existing reporting entities by 31 March 2026 and for new reporting entities by 1 July 2026.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>The Draft Rules contain significant updates to the first exposure draft rules which were released for consultation in December 2024. The updates include:\n<ul>\n<li>AML\/CTF policies, procedures, systems and controls to comply with AML\/CTF obligations, including requiring designated entities to have financial sanctions compliance policies<\/li>\n<li>New rules relating to groups of regulated businesses<\/li>\n<li>Changes to the proposed customer due diligence rules<\/li>\n<li>Correspondent banking and nested services relationships<\/li>\n<li>The travel rule, being the requirement for information about the payer and payee to be included with telegraphic transfers, remittances, transfers of virtual assets and other value transfers<\/li>\n<li>Cross-border movement reports and compliance reporting<\/li>\n<li>Keep open notices and the form of these notices<\/li>\n<li>Disclosure of AUSTRAC information to foreign counterparts\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li>\u201cIn addition to the above, the exposure Draft Rules now propose:\n<ul>\n<li>Reportable details for \u2018suspicious matter reports\u2019 must be given to AUSTRAC by reporting entities under section 41 of the amended AML\/CTF Act.<\/li>\n<li>Reportable details for \u2018threshold transaction reports\u2019 must be given to AUSTRAC under section 43 of the amended AML\/CTF Act.\u201d<br \/>Updated and modernised enrolment applications for all reporting entities.<\/li>\n<li>\u201cRegistration application and administrative decision-making processes for \u2018remittance service providers\u2019 and \u2018virtual asset service providers\u2019.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>\u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.accountingtimes.com.au\/profession\/accounting-firms-should-build-aml-ctf-program-sooner-rather-than-later-holding-redlich\"><strong>Accounting firms should build AML\/CTF program \u2018sooner rather than later\u2019<\/strong><\/a>\u201d \u2014<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>\u201cAhead of the ACE25 Accounting Conference and Expo, Jessica Tsiakis, partner at Holding Redlich discusses how businesses can prepare for the upcoming AML\/CTF regulations.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201c\u2018The AML\/CTF Act has been amended to ensure the AML\/CTF regime can effectively deter, detect and disrupt money laundering and terrorism financing,\u2019 said Tsiakis.\u201d<br \/>\u201c\u2018There have been a number of changes to the legislation, but key for accountants are the changes to expand the regime to capture certain high-risk services provided by accountants,\u2019 she added.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cThere are three key objectives of the Amendment Act including expanding the AML\/CTF regime to high-risk services provided by tranche two entities; modernising the regulation of digital currency, virtual assets, and payments technology; and simplifying the AML\/CTF regime to better prevent and detect financial crime.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201c\u2018The regime is expanded by including new definitions of what are referred to as designated services,\u2019 she said.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201c\u2018If you provide a designated service, you are regulated by the regime in respect of those services (and referred to as a \u2018Reporting Entity\u2019).&#8217;\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201c\u2018Professionals such as accountants, lawyers, and real estate agents are impacted by the expansion of the regime.&#8217;\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cThe updated AML\/CTF obligations will come into effect on 1 July 2026 for tranche two entities, with enrollment with AUSTRAC available from 31 March 2026.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cThis timeline provides newly regulated entities the chance to understand and prepare for the new obligations before they come into effect next year.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201c\u2018Accounting firms need to ensure that they have developed an appropriate AML\/CTF Program, which is in place well prior to the deadline, so that they are in a place to comply by July 2026,\u2019 Tsiakis said.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201c\u2018Accounting firms must also develop appropriate policies, procedures, systems and controls to properly manage these risks.&#8217;\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201c\u2018Accounting firms will need to ensure all professional services staff have a broad understanding of what is required by the regime, including how to properly identify and monitor their customers, and who within the business to alert if they notice suspicious transactions or conduct by their clients,\u2019 she added.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cTsiakis urges organisations to start the preparations sooner rather than later, stating that \u2018some key challenges in complying will be ensuring that the organisation\u2019s AML\/CTF program is up and running before the new regime commences, so that any issues, such as the appropriate monitoring of transactions, or proper customer due diligence, can be ironed out prior to that time,\u2019 she concluded.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<p>\u201c<a href=\"https:\/\/www.lexology.com\/library\/detail.aspx?g=2483748c-7532-4818-a993-9e592dc6d86e\"><strong>9 AML compliance myths and how law firms can fix them<\/strong><\/a>\u201d \u2014<\/p>\n<ul>\n<li>\u201cIn the current climate, no law firm can afford complacency about AML compliance. Yet certain myths persist \u2013 misconceptions that can lull firms into a false sense of security. These myths often stem from outdated assumptions or a misunderstanding of SRA requirements.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cUnfortunately, reliance on such misinformation can have serious consequences. The SRA has ramped up its enforcement of rules in recent years. Firms that once flew under the radar are now finding themselves subject to audits, fines, and disciplinary action.\u201d<\/li>\n<li>\u201cCOLPs, COFAs, law firm partners, and risk managers should take note: even well-intentioned myths can land a firm in trouble. By dispelling these myths, your firm can shift from a reactive stance to a proactive compliance culture that anticipates regulators\u2019 expectations.\u201d<\/li>\n<li><strong>\u201c1. \u2018We\u2019re too small to need all these formal AML documents.\u2019<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li>The Myth: Small firms sometimes believe that comprehensive anti-money laundering controls \u2013 like a firm-wide AML policy or risk assessment \u2013 only apply to higher risk firms or those handling large financial transactions. A two-partner high-street practice might think, \u2018Money laundering won\u2019t happen here \u2013 we know our clients, and regulators only focus on large firms.\u2019 This myth implies that limited size or simple client bases exempt a firm from formal AML compliance.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>2. \u2018As long as we do really thorough ID checks, we\u2019re covered for AML.&#8217;\u201d<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li>\u201cThe Myth: Many solicitors equate \u2018AML compliance\u2019 with performing ID checks on clients at onboarding \u2013 copying passports, driver\u2019s licenses, utility bills, etc. This myth is the belief that identity verification alone satisfies anti-money laundering due diligence. Once you\u2019ve verified your client is who they say they are, the thinking goes, your anti-money laundering obligations are done. In reality, this is a dangerous oversimplification, based on outdated AML rules.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>3. \u2018We can\u2019t possibly have to check the other side\u2019s client for sanctions.&#8217;\u201d<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li>\u201cThe Myth: Lawyers often focus AML and sanctions checks on their own client, under the assumption that you are only responsible for vetting those you directly represent. This myth holds that due diligence on opposing parties or the other side\u2019s client is not necessary, since \u2018they\u2019re not our client.\u2019 For example, in a transaction between A (your client) and B (opposing party), a solicitor might screen A against sanctions lists but not consider B. The misconception is that sanctions compliance is satisfied as long as you aren\u2019t directly advising a sanctioned individual.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>4. \u2018The SRA doesn\u2019t really expect us to see our own employees as an AML risk.&#8217;\u201d<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li>\u201cThe Myth: This misconception assumes that anti-money laundering compliance is solely outward-facing \u2013 focused on clients and external parties \u2013 and that a law firm\u2019s staff are implicitly trusted. Some firms might think employee due diligence isn\u2019t a regulatory requirement, perhaps reasoning that \u2018we hired qualified solicitors, we don\u2019t need to screen or monitor them for AML issues.\u2019 Similarly, there might be an assumption that as long as staff are hired in good faith, the firm won\u2019t be held responsible for a \u2018rogue employee\u2019 engaging in misconduct.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>5. \u2018If we report an AML breach, we\u2019ll face harsh consequences.&#8217;\u201d<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li>\u201cThe Myth: Law firm leaders sometimes believe that reporting AML compliance breaches \u2013 whether to the National Crime Agency (NCA) or the SRA \u2013 is like inviting trouble. The assumption is that disclosing AML issues will inevitably lead to severe penalties or regulatory action, and therefore it\u2019s better to quietly fix any problems internally, turn a blind eye to red flags, and hope regulators don\u2019t notice.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>6. \u2018The regulators are only really interested in the risk assessment for our firm. Individual matter risk assessments aren\u2019t as important.&#8217;\u201d<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li>\u201cThe Myth: Some firms mistakenly believe that doing a one-time Practice-Wide Risk Assessment (aka Firm-Wide Risk Assessment) is sufficient, and that they do not need to conduct risk assessments for each client or matter. They might have a generic firm AML risk assessment document and assume that covers everything. The myth is essentially ignoring the requirement for matter-specific risk evaluation, perhaps due to misunderstanding the regulations or viewing it as unnecessary form-filling. \u201c<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>7. \u2018We\u2019ve never had a regulatory inspection, so we must be a low AML risk.&#8217;\u201d<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li>\u201cThe Myth: This is a complacency-driven myth \u2013 the notion that silence implies everything is fine. Many firms have not yet been subject to an SRA AML inspection or any kind of in-depth compliance audit, but the SRA is thought to be planning around 800 per year. It\u2019s easy to assume that since the regulator hasn\u2019t knocked on the door, your policies and procedures must be acceptable. Some might even think the SRA only audits firms it suspects of issues, so being un-audited means you\u2019re low-risk or off their radar.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>8. \u2018We\u2019ve known the client for years \u2013 they\u2019re not a risk.&#8217;\u201d<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li>\u201cThe Myth: A common assumption in legal practices is that long-term or well-known clients pose little to no money laundering risk. Firms often think, \u2018We\u2019ve acted for this client for over a decade, we know their business inside out,\u2019 or \u2018They\u2019re a local business owner we\u2019ve seen grow from day one \u2013 surely there\u2019s no risk here.\u2019 \u201c<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<li><strong>9. \u2018We onboarded this client in a low-risk area, so we don\u2019t need to do AML checks again.&#8217;\u201d<\/strong>\n<ul>\n<li>\u201cThe Myth: A frequent assumption is that if a client initially instructs the firm in a low-risk area like employment law, they pose minimal or no money laundering risk across the board. The reasoning often goes: \u2018We onboarded them for straightforward redundancy advice,\u2019 or \u2018They\u2019ve only needed us for staff contracts \u2013 there\u2019s no complexity here.\u2019 This myth creates a \u2018passporting\u2019 effect \u2013 where a client is allowed to access other, potentially riskier services without updated checks, just because they originally entered through a low-risk door.\u201d<\/li>\n<\/ul>\n<\/li>\n<\/ul><\/div>\n<p><!-- .entry-content --><\/p>\n<p>\t<!-- .entry-footer --><\/p>\n<\/div>\n\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>New York Judicial Ethics Opinion 25-01: \u201cA judge need not disqualify in matters involving the judge\u2019s former election opponent, provided the judge can be fair and impartial\u201d \u2014 \u201cDigest: A judge need not disqualify in matters involving the judge\u2019s former election opponent, provided the judge can be fair and impartial.\u201dRules: Judiciary Law \u00a7 14; 22 [&hellip;]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":284902,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[114686],"tags":[31789,47771,55326,13232,1820,3646,11115,11199],"dealstore":[],"offerexpiration":[],"class_list":["post-284901","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-risk-update","tag-aml","tag-disqualification","tag-exception","tag-judicial","tag-news","tag-reading","tag-risk","tag-views"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO plugin v26.4 - https:\/\/yoast.com\/wordpress\/plugins\/seo\/ -->\n<title>Risk Reading \u2014 Judicial Disqualification Exception, AML News and Views - Som2ny Network<\/title>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Risk Reading \u2014 Judicial Disqualification Exception, AML News and Views - Som2ny Network\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"New York Judicial Ethics Opinion 25-01: \u201cA judge need not disqualify in matters involving the judge\u2019s former election opponent, provided the judge can be fair and impartial\u201d \u2014 \u201cDigest: A judge need not disqualify in matters involving the judge\u2019s former election opponent, provided the judge can be fair and impartial.\u201dRules: Judiciary Law \u00a7 14; 22 [&hellip;]\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Som2ny Network\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2025-06-10T03:00:40+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/2019_judge.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"480\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"273\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"admin\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"11 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"admin\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/person\/b85e3c3dc0e1daea076524dc8810c371\"},\"headline\":\"Risk Reading \u2014 Judicial Disqualification Exception, AML News and Views\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-06-10T03:00:40+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901\"},\"wordCount\":2102,\"commentCount\":0,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/2019_judge.jpg\",\"keywords\":[\"AML\",\"Disqualification\",\"exception\",\"Judicial\",\"NEWS\",\"Reading\",\"risk\",\"Views\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Risk Update\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901\",\"name\":\"Risk Reading \u2014 Judicial Disqualification Exception, AML News and Views - Som2ny Network\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/2019_judge.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2025-06-10T03:00:40+00:00\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/2019_judge.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/2019_judge.jpg\",\"width\":480,\"height\":273},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?bp_activities=1\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Risk Reading \u2014 Judicial Disqualification Exception, AML News and Views\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/\",\"name\":\"Som2ny Network\",\"description\":\"Daily Deals\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#organization\",\"name\":\"Som2ny Network\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/4a0953c4-logo-300x86-1.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/4a0953c4-logo-300x86-1.png\",\"width\":300,\"height\":86,\"caption\":\"Som2ny Network\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/person\/b85e3c3dc0e1daea076524dc8810c371\",\"name\":\"admin\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/729ae85bf62b9917e93538db2f2688ca?s=96&r=g&default=https%3A%2F%2Ffivemor.com%2Fwp-content%2Fplugins%2Fbuddypress-first-letter-avatar%2Fimages%2Fdefault%2F96%2Flatin_a.png\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/729ae85bf62b9917e93538db2f2688ca?s=96&r=g&default=https%3A%2F%2Ffivemor.com%2Fwp-content%2Fplugins%2Fbuddypress-first-letter-avatar%2Fimages%2Fdefault%2F96%2Flatin_a.png\",\"caption\":\"admin\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\"],\"url\":\"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?author=1\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Risk Reading \u2014 Judicial Disqualification Exception, AML News and Views - Som2ny Network","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Risk Reading \u2014 Judicial Disqualification Exception, AML News and Views - Som2ny Network","og_description":"New York Judicial Ethics Opinion 25-01: \u201cA judge need not disqualify in matters involving the judge\u2019s former election opponent, provided the judge can be fair and impartial\u201d \u2014 \u201cDigest: A judge need not disqualify in matters involving the judge\u2019s former election opponent, provided the judge can be fair and impartial.\u201dRules: Judiciary Law \u00a7 14; 22 [&hellip;]","og_url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901","og_site_name":"Som2ny Network","article_published_time":"2025-06-10T03:00:40+00:00","og_image":[{"width":480,"height":273,"url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/2019_judge.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"admin","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"admin","Est. reading time":"11 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901"},"author":{"name":"admin","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/person\/b85e3c3dc0e1daea076524dc8810c371"},"headline":"Risk Reading \u2014 Judicial Disqualification Exception, AML News and Views","datePublished":"2025-06-10T03:00:40+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901"},"wordCount":2102,"commentCount":0,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/2019_judge.jpg","keywords":["AML","Disqualification","exception","Judicial","NEWS","Reading","risk","Views"],"articleSection":["Risk Update"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901","url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901","name":"Risk Reading \u2014 Judicial Disqualification Exception, AML News and Views - Som2ny Network","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/2019_judge.jpg","datePublished":"2025-06-10T03:00:40+00:00","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/2019_judge.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/06\/2019_judge.jpg","width":480,"height":273},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?p=284901#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?bp_activities=1"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Risk Reading \u2014 Judicial Disqualification Exception, AML News and Views"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#website","url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/","name":"Som2ny Network","description":"Daily Deals","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#organization","name":"Som2ny Network","url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/4a0953c4-logo-300x86-1.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/07\/4a0953c4-logo-300x86-1.png","width":300,"height":86,"caption":"Som2ny Network"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/person\/b85e3c3dc0e1daea076524dc8810c371","name":"admin","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/#\/schema\/person\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/729ae85bf62b9917e93538db2f2688ca?s=96&r=g&default=https%3A%2F%2Ffivemor.com%2Fwp-content%2Fplugins%2Fbuddypress-first-letter-avatar%2Fimages%2Fdefault%2F96%2Flatin_a.png","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/729ae85bf62b9917e93538db2f2688ca?s=96&r=g&default=https%3A%2F%2Ffivemor.com%2Fwp-content%2Fplugins%2Fbuddypress-first-letter-avatar%2Fimages%2Fdefault%2F96%2Flatin_a.png","caption":"admin"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/fivemor.com"],"url":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/?author=1"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/284901","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=284901"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/284901\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/media\/284902"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=284901"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=284901"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=284901"},{"taxonomy":"dealstore","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fdealstore&post=284901"},{"taxonomy":"offerexpiration","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/fivemor.com\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fofferexpiration&post=284901"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}