Nothing So Like a God on Earth: Our Corrupt Judicial System

Hey, this time there is a tech hook to a rant!

The judge overseeing the X vs Media Matters case, Musk’s attempt to use legal fees to shut down his critics (wow, so much free speech absolutism from Musk! No wonder he has to allow neo-Nazis and racism on his platform — otherwise, our great Free Speech Warrior Musk would look hypocritical) owns up to 50k of Tesla stock. He is refusing to recuse from the case, possibly in part because Musk forum shopped in such a way as to ensure this judge would be assigned to the case. But I think, in this case, the cause is actually more disturbing. I think that the US judicial system has simply lost the ability to not be corrupt.

The judge claims that since tesla and X are separate companies, there is no conflict of interest. This is transparent bullshit, of course. Tesla and X are largely driven by public impressions of Musk, and analysts have discussed Musk needing to sell Tesla stock, thus devaluing it, to keep X afloat. The two companies are clearly connected and thus the judge should recuse himself. He has a clear conflict of interest. But that doesn’t seem to matter to our modern judiciary. It appears that judges as a class see themselves as above the rest of society.

You have judges misbehaving in disturbing ways, from threatening a child with jail and putting them in handcuffs for falling asleep in their courtroom on a trip, to illegally jailing children, to accepting rich quasi-vacations put on by big business to influence tier decisions. But the issue is deeper. The concept of conflict of interest seems to be completely ignored. Pro Publica has an excellent article about the fact that judges who hold stock in companies that come before them routinely do NOT recuse themselves. And of course, Thomas and Alito have taken perks from people who appear before them and not recused themselves. The rot comes from the top.

All of this is important because it destroys the trust in the law. A judge is supposed to be a neutral arbiter, keeping the two sides within the bounds of the law and accepted procedures. They need to be completely above suspicion. But the judiciary has gotten to the point where they don’t seem to think that corruption can apply to their actions. The Supreme Court doesn’t even have an enforceable code of conduct or ethics. The system, from the top down, is clearly telling the rest of us that they don’t have to prove their impartiality or judgment to the rest of us. The whole system needs a sledgehammer token to it.

You cannot have a civil society without the rule of law. All of the peace and stability we enjoy as a society comes from the fact that laws, supposedly, rule us, not people. The Supreme Court’s horrific Trump immunity decision brought this to the forefront for many people, but the issues has been simmering for much, much longer. We live with a judiciary that does not believe in accountability for itself. And since it does not, we as citizens cannot be sure that we are ruled by laws and not people. When a judge oversees a case in which they have a financial stake, when they substitute their own desire to punish children for the actual law, the foundations of a just and civil society are chipped away. And once they topple, why would anyone treat the law as something to be upheld?