Over 100 Federal Judges Heard Cases Despite Conflicts Of Interest

Nearly 700 federal court cases from 2010 to 2018 were heard by 131 judges who had financial ties to a company that was part of the case, the Wall Street Journal reported, and in two-thirds of those cases they ruled in favor of the company. KEY FACTS Some 131 federal judges heard 685 cases in which they or family members held stock in a company involved in the case, the Journal reported Tuesday. After being contacted by the Journal, 56 of the 131 judges had their staff begin to tell people in 329 lawsuits that the judge should have recused themselves. In 21 cases, a judge or family held more than $50,000 in stock of a company involved in the litigation, while in 173 cases the holdings were higher than $15,000. Rodney Gilstrap, the chief federal judge for the Eastern District of Texas, led his peers with 138 cases in which he had a conflict of interest. New judges could be assigned to those cases—potentially changing the ruling—and some people who lost cases have already asked for that, the Journal reported. Key Quote “If you are a federal judge, you should not be holding individual stocks,” said Andrew O’Connor, whose suit against Comcast was sent to a state court—a development favored by the company—by Judge Lewis Babcock, of the U.S. District Court of Colorado. At the time, Babcock or his family owned at least $15,001 in Comcast stock and may have owned as much as $50,000. For his part, Babcock said “I dropped the ball.” His office did not have an adequate process for checking for conflicts of interest, he said. Chief Critic The report “raises a more systemic problem of judges chronically neglecting their duty to disqualify in such… Read More

QUICK EASY SHARE OPTIONS PRESS + FOR MORE

131 Federal Judges Broke the Law by Hearing Cases Where They Had a Financial Interest

More than 130 federal judges broke the law and violated ethics by hearing cases involving companies they had a financial interest in over 11 years

More than 130 federal judges broke the law and violated ethics by hearing cases involving companies they had a financial interest in over 11 years An investigation found that more than 130 judges violated US law by overseeing cases involving companies in which they or their family held direct stock The report found that these judges have improperly failed to recuse themselves from 685 US court cases since 2010 The jurists were appointed by presidents whose terms have spanned seven decades, from Lyndon B. Johnson to Donald J. Trump Roughly two-thirds of the 131 jurists’ rulings ended up being in favor of their or their family’s financial interests Of the two-thirds of judges who disclosed stock holdings, about a fifth of them presided over at least one case that involved their stock, the report showed An investigation found that 131 federal judges violated US law by overseeing cases involving companies in which they or their family held direct stock, The Wall Street Journal reported. The judges failed to recuse themselves from 685 cases across the nation in which they held financial interest since 2010, the investigation revealed. What’s more, when the judges participated in these cases, roughly two-thirds of their rulings ended up being in favor of their or their family’s financial interests. While there are no laws that prohibit judges from owning stocks, the federal jurists’ code of conduct demands judges recuse themselves in the event that they hold any semblance of financial interest in a case – or, the ‘ownership of a legal or equitable interest, however small,’ as the set of regulations defines it. The cases in question were all held between the years 2010 and 2020 – and of the two-thirds of federal judges who disclosed… Read More