You are viewing a single thread.
View all comments
29 points

For anyone confused by this headline, there are two trials this judge is considering for X

[O’Conner] was overseeing two lawsuits filed by X and recused himself from only one of the cases.

This isn’t the new case about the “illegal boycott” O’Conner has recused himself from that trial (likely) because he also owns stock in Unilever, one of the defending companies

permalink
report
reply
9 points

Oh, so if a judge has a vested interest in more than 1 party, then they should recuse themselves from the case.
Good to know where the line is

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points
*

The judge’s argument is that Tesla, which he owns stock in, isn’t a party in the suit against Media Matters, just X. It’s a pretty stupid argument, but he wouldn’t be able to hurt Media Matters if he recused himself.

permalink
report
parent
reply
4 points

Ah this makes more sense. I thought I had heard about a recusal.

permalink
report
parent
reply
2 points

Yeah the news of this non-recusal came too soon after the other recusal. Very confusing timeline if you didn’t know there were two cases

permalink
report
parent
reply
3 points

Judges really shouldn’t be allowed to own stock. And if they do it should be blind trusts.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Technology

!technology@lemmy.world

Create post

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


Community stats

  • 18K

    Monthly active users

  • 4.9K

    Posts

  • 84K

    Comments