Posted on 09/28/2021 8:56:18 PM PDT by george76
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..
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
...
Judges offered multiple explanations for their infringements when confronted .
...
In Colorado, Judge Lewis Babcock oversaw particularly troubling proceedings involving a Comcast Corp. subsidiary, in which he ruled in the telecommunications company's favor after several of their employees were accused of harassing a family in Colorado.
In the case, a couple accused the telephone service company's employees of threatening them, intimidating their 10-year-old daughter, and physically injuring their dog.
The pair asked Babcock to issue a judicial order barring the company from accessing their property to install fiber-optic cables.
Babcock - who was appointed by Ronald Reagan - ruled that the couple had 'continually blocked Comcast's access to the easement,' and sent the case back to state court, which was what Comcast wanted.
All the while, the judge or his family reportedly held between $15,001 and $50,000 in Comcast stock, the report revealed.
'I dropped the ball,' Babcock attested when asked about his conflict of interest in the case.
The jurist went on to blame the infraction on internal administrative mishaps, and thanked the Journal for 'helping me stay on my toes the way I'm supposed to.'
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
I’d say that they should all be asked to resign or face prosecution except that would give Biden a lot of judicial nominees. In any case, they should be sanctioned.
What a shock.
The Comcast ruling went the way it ought to have gone tho. Easements MUST be honored, and the family was in the wrong trying to block access.
Judge still should have recused himself to liberate the case from the whiff of bias, but the argument that this family lost their case because of the Judge’s stock holdings is laughable; they lost because they reneged on a legal contract to allow access, and got their asses duly kicked by the word of the Law.
What would you expect, when the forces of evil are allowed to nominate and confirm judges?
ZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZZ, nothing will be done….. back to sleep Americans
Umm - why do you think this is “news” all of a sudden? They’ve got less than 12 months of Senate control left for new confirmations and even many of the Clinton and Obambi judges are corporate stooges and definitely not woke enough for the modern Rat voter.
The judges are small-time...Federal Reserve Bank presidents do “insider information” deals worth millions!
I was Secretary to a Federal Court Judge The law clerks and I went over the list of her financial dealings and checked it against the cases she was assigned so she could recuse herself. We were very thorough.
More evidence of how laws are interpreted in such a way as to benefit those connected to power.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.