(RoyalPatriot.com )- A shocking investigation by The Wall Street Journal just revealed how 131 federal judges oversaw court cases that involved companies they either personally owned stock in or their families owned stock in.
The investigation revealed how the judges didn’t recuse themselves from a total of 685 cases where they had a personal stake in the game, meaning there could have been hundreds of cases influenced by bias or conflicts of interest.
The investigation discovered these instances of judges not recusing themselves between 2010 and 2020. It revealed how two-thirds of federal district judges disclosed their individual stock holdings, and some 20% of those judges had heard at least one case that involved the company they owned stocks of.
Once the Wall Street Journal compiled the information and informed the judges of their findings, 56 judges went out of their way to alert all parties involved in a total of 329 lawsuits of their conflict of interest.
Many explanations were given to the Journal by judges defending their decision not to recuse themselves. Some claimed that there were problems with conflict-screening search software, while others claimed they only played insignificant roles in some cases that didn’t require any legal exemptions.
Technically there is no rule banning a judge from holding individual stocks, but the code of conduct that federal judges must abide by does require that they recuse themselves in the event that they have any “ownership of a legal or equitable interest, however small” in a party involved with a case they are overseeing.
If you had failed in a lawsuit overseen by a judge with a conflict of interest, what would you do?
Yeah, that’s what you’d do. And that’s probably what a lot of losing parties are about to do now, too.
Read the full report here.