Elon Musk wants judge recused for liking LinkedIn post mocking $2 billion verdict

[midian182]

Winners & losers: Be careful what you write or like on the internet – you never know when it might come back to haunt you. Lawyers for Elon Musk are trying to prove that this warning should be heeded in a lawsuit against the Tesla CEO. They say a Delaware judge should step aside because she liked a LinkedIn post mocking a $2 billion verdict against him in a separate California case, thereby showing bias.

Musk and Tesla filed the recusal motion this week in Delaware's Court of Chancery, arguing that Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick "supported" a LinkedIn post criticizing Musk and Quinn Emanuel, the law firm representing him. The filing says that this wasn't the default thumbs-up reaction but LinkedIn's heart-in-hand "Support" emoji, which the lawyers pointed out require a deliberate extra step to select.

The post at the center of the dispute came after a federal jury in San Francisco found Musk liable in a shareholder lawsuit over his 2022 Twitter takeover saga. Jurors said he was responsible for trying to drive down Twitter's stock price with posts about bots and fake accounts so he could renegotiate or escape the $44 billion deal. Damages haven't been set, but plaintiffs' counsel said they could reach about $2.5 billion.

If one LinkedIn reaction wasn't enough, the filing says there was another. Musk's legal team also flagged a separate anti-Musk post that received a like from an account linked to the judge's chambers, including a message saying "so many people who should be so deeply ashamed of themselves seem incapable of being so."

McCormick says the whole thing is either a mistake or something stranger. In her own filing, the judge said she either never clicked the reaction or did so accidentally, adding that she reported suspicious activity to LinkedIn. She has put two shareholder cases involving Musk on pause while she considers the recusal request.

One of those cases involves claims that Musk illegally profited by allegedly misleading investors about Tesla stock sales ahead of the Twitter purchase. The other is a separate Tesla derivative matter, and the pause also extends to a dispute over legal fees.

Musk and the judge have a history. McCormick previously oversaw Twitter's lawsuit to force Musk to close the acquisition after he tried to back out, and she also struck down his massive Tesla compensation package before Delaware's Supreme Court reversed that decision in December 2025. During the California trial, Musk testified that he believed McCormick was biased against him.

Permalink to story:

Elon Musk wants judge recused for liking LinkedIn post mocking $2 billion verdict

 

[The Talking Tech]

Since when the private sector can demand a judge to take back what they think?

Oh yes, since Trump happened.

 

[ShadowDeath]

Since when the private sector can demand a judge to take back what they think?

Oh yes, since Trump happened.

Best I can tell that isn't what is happening here. They're not asking her to take back her reactions or her likes. They're asking her to recuse herself from the case so another judge can handle it. Her and Musk have history, him and his legal team believe she is biased against him. Considering she is a human like the rest of us it is entirely possible.

 

[m4a4]

...What sort of id!ot goes around on "social media" liking biased posts related to her "unbiased" trial? Especially after being accused of being biased?

Strange activity my ***. She just didn't think she'd get caught, or worse. And is too dishonest to admit it.

Which is exactly the sort of judge people want.
/sarcasm

 

[Dreadcthulhu]

Since when the private sector can demand a judge to take back what they think?

Oh yes, since Trump happened.

Asking a judge to recuse themselves because they have made negative public statements about one of the parties in a case they are overseeing is a perfectly normal thing, since at least the founding of the US.

 

[Plutoisaplanet]

Since when the private sector can demand a judge to take back what they think?

Oh yes, since Trump happened.

It's not surprising that some people will think everything is about Trump, but this is in a state court regarding state judges lol. Lawyers can make all sorts of crazy motions and they will be denied by the judges. In this case, since the motion was filed with the Delaware's Court of Chancery, all of its judges were appointed by the governor of Delaware. That office has been elected to be someone from the Democratic party for the last 34 years, and the last judge appointed by a Republican to serve on the court ended his term in 2003: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delaware_Court_of_Chancery

Unless you're suggesting that Demcrats or lawyers have gone crazy since Trump "happened", I don't think your answer is at all related to your question.

 

[Norsiiii]

Since when the private sector can demand a judge to take back what they think?

Oh yes, since Trump happened.

You're not seriously arguing that a judge who has publicly mocked one of the parties to a trial that they're adjudicating is a normal, fair part of any country's justice system, are you?

In absolutely any other planet on earth, except apparently America, would everybody unanimously agree that any judge with that sort of bias would be instantly recused, and it wouldn't even make the news in any other country. Yet here you are, acting like its some sort of corruption to even ASK that the judge be recused? That's how insane you are.