Whether the language 'might reasonably be questioned' under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a) can be judicially restricted to require that a petitioner establish an actual error in judgment

question presented is whether the language “might reasonably be questioned” under 28 U.S.C. § 455(a) can be judicially restricted to require that a petitioner establish an actual error in judgment, when this contradicts binding Supreme Court precedent, holdings on the same issue in various circuit courts and longstanding canons of statutory construction. The second question presented is whether outside payment arrangements between a party to litigation and an agent of the court sufficiently satisfy the “outside proceedings” requirement of the “extrajudicial source” rule.