On Tuesday, December 3, 2024, The Frank Report reported that U.S. District Judge Eric Komitee is facing calls for impeachment due to allegations of financial conflicts of interest in a civil lawsuit related to COVID-19 vaccines. The complaint, filed by over 60 former New York City employees, is spearheaded by attorney Jo Saint-George, representing the group Women of Color for Equal Justice.

The complainants allege that Judge Komitee failed to disclose significant financial interests in Moderna, the manufacturer of one of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccines, which was central to their case. They assert that Komitee’s prior role as General Counsel for Viking Global Investors, a hedge fund that participated in a $500 million investment in Moderna, constitutes a serious conflict of interest. The plaintiffs claim that this conflict was pivotal in the judge’s dismissal of their lawsuit in September 2024.

The lawsuit stems from the City of New York’s 2021 vaccine mandate, which required city employees to receive COVID-19 vaccinations to maintain their employment. The plaintiffs, primarily tenured teachers and employees from various city departments, argued that the mandate violated their First Amendment rights and protections under the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA). They contend that the vaccines did not meet OSHA safety standards and could not effectively prevent airborne transmission of COVID-19.

According to the complaint, Judge Komitee dismissed the case without hearing critical motions, including those challenging the City’s legal arguments. The plaintiffs allege that the judge’s close ties to Moderna’s financing create an irreconcilable conflict of interest, raising questions about his impartiality.

In addition to the vaccine case, Judge Komitee is embroiled in another controversy involving Carlos Watson, the former CEO of Ozy Media, who has accused the judge of misconduct in his own legal proceedings. Watson, facing significant prison time for conspiracy charges, has filed a motion to disqualify Komitee, citing undisclosed investments the judge had in companies that testified against him during the trial. Watson’s legal team claims that these financial ties present a serious conflict of interest and give rise to an appearance of impropriety.

The complaint against Judge Komitee highlights patterns of undisclosed wealth and potential conflicts of interest. Financial disclosure reports indicate that the judge’s wealth ranges from $60 million to $102 million, much of which is attributed to his tenure at Viking Global and investments in firms like Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan—entities involved in Watson’s case.

During Watson’s trial, representatives from Google and Goldman Sachs, both major players in his conspiracy case, testified against him. The judge reportedly held over $1 million in stock in these companies during the proceedings. Although Komitee denied any conflict of interest by stating he did not directly own stock, but rather held interests through hedge funds, this explanation has not satisfied critics.

In light of these allegations, the judicial misconduct complaint requests an investigation by a special committee under the Judicial Conduct and Disability Act and a referral to the House of Representatives for impeachment proceedings. The complaint underscores that judges are required to recuse themselves when they possess personal knowledge of disputed facts concerning a case or when their impartiality might reasonably be questioned.

Saint-George’s investigation into Judge Komitee followed the dismissal of the vaccine case, uncovering his involvement in Moderna’s mRNA vaccine financing during his time at Viking Global Investors. As General Counsel from 2008 to 2018, Komitee was responsible for due diligence reviews related to Moderna, including its corporate structure and compliance with FDA regulations.

The complaint raises concerns about Komitee’s ability to impartially handle cases involving Moderna or vaccine mandates in the future. The plaintiffs argue that the judge’s knowledge of Moderna’s vaccine technology and safety compliance further disqualifies him from ruling on related cases.

 

 

Source: The Frank Report