I did not read the complete decision. But I think he was consulting the ethics rules and concluded he had to. I'm not well versed in that area.
Yep, sounds like the judge just wanted out. Dont really blame him, but that is the job he signed up for. Bailing because of some small Disney investment a distant relative has may be technically right, tho Im not sure, but it certainly seems lame in context.
Respectfully, you don't know what you're talking about. In my opinion, Judge Walker is the best judge in the state. He has never hesitated to decide big cases. He has never hesitated to rule against DeSantis when he should. He has never hesitated to rule the correct way, regardless of what the Eleventh Circuit would ultimately do. He's doing the principled thing here. He isn't remotely scared of high-stake cases or DeSantis.
Assuming u are correct, why bail then on such a minor point?? 30 shares of disney stock owned by a distant relative is a conflict worthy of stepping aside?? C'mon. Has to be more to it than that to make sense to me.
Code of Conduct for United States Judges A judge shall disqualify himself or herself in a proceeding in which the judge’s impartiality might reasonably be questioned, including but not limited to instances in which: the judge or the judge’s spouse, or a person related to either within the third degree of relationship, or the spouse of such a person is: known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding. That's Canon 3(C)(1)(d)(iii). He's complying with his ethical obligations.
Judge was an Obama appointee, so everything he does is correct and just. Looks like you'll just have to accept his righteousness in recusing himself from the case. Looks like DeSantis will get the last laugh.
And if you read the order, Judge Walker called out DeSantis's tactics: "Without exploring all the other defects in the motion, for the reasons noted above and as thoughtfully outlined in Plaintiff’s response, Defendants’ motion is wholly without merit. In fact, I find the motion is nothing more than rank judge-shopping. Sadly, this practice has become all too common in this district. Cf. Common Cause Fla. v. Lee, Case No. 4:22-cv-109-AW-MAF, 2022 WL 2343366, at *1 (N.D. Fla. Apr. 6, 2022) (dismissing meritless motion to disqualify in a redistricting case)." From the order: "The size or dollar amount of the third-degree relative’s financial interest is irrelevant, as it is 'not the size of the interest that is a concern under [Canon 3C], but rather whether the interest could be substantially affected.' Thus, a judge’s knowledge that a third-degree relative owns just one share of stock in a corporation, with the price of that stock being a single dollar per share, is enough to trigger the obligation to determine if the proceeding’s outcome could substantially affect the value of that single share of stock." He cited an on-point advisory opinion (No. 94) on the code of conduct. You can read the order for yourself (Dkt. No. 45): WALT DISNEY PARKS AND RESORTS US INC v. DESANTIS, 4:23-cv-00163 - CourtListener.com
Well, I will take your word for that being the standard. However, I seriously doubt many follow it to this extreme. I know I wouldn't "reasonably question the impartiality" of any judge given this limited information. If the judge's wife had the Disney investment or the judge had played golf with Iger or the judge had relatives working at Disney, etc etc, sure recuse yourself. Disney is a major S&P 500 company. In reality, most anybody that invests in S&P 500 or total stock market index funds indirectly owns Disney stock or their competitors in their investment portfolio and theoretically have a conflict. All irrelevant tho as the decision has been made.
I would bet there isn’t a single judge on the entire circuit that doesn’t have at least one relative who has a mutual fund with some Disney stock in it. That seems an insane bar to get over.
