The Milwaukee Cemetery-Fund Bankruptcy Ruling: RFRA and Recusal Claims

The National Catholic Reporter has a story analyzing Judge Randa's ruling in Milwaukee that including cemetery trust funds in the archdiocesan bankruptcy estate violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act.  I'm quoted among other commentators.  It's a difficult case.  Is this a matter that should be determined by RFRA, as opposed to whether cemetery funds were properly segregated in trust funds before the potential claims appeared?

The creditors' committee, represented by Marci Hamilton among others, indicates they not only will appeal Judge Randa's ruling to the 7th CIrcuit but are also considering a recusal motion against Judge Randa on the ground that, as Marci states it, "many of his family members are buried in the very cemeteries that were the subject of the opinion."  The bankruptcy judge has ordered, and the Archdiocese has agreed, to turn over cemetery records to the creditors' committee to provide facts relevant to such a motion.  I'm not an expert on recusal.  My gut is that the theory of recusal would be too broad here, perhaps disqualifying most Catholic judges in the archdiocese (judges who might, like other Catholics, have quite a variety of personal views about which of the Church's moral obligations, including to possible victims, should take priority).  But is there a sufficiently specific financial interest that might provide a basis for recusal (like the prospect of increased fees for a judge for maintaining family members' graves)?