On Tuesday, August 20, 2024, the New York Post reported that a Texas federal judge rejected a bid by Media Matters to force his recusal from a defamation lawsuit brought against the organization by Elon Musk’s X Corp.
US District Judge Reed O’Connor, who has disclosed owning stock in Tesla worth between $15,001 and $50,000, shot down an effort by Media Matters to label Tesla as an “interested party” in the lawsuit. Media Matters argued that Judge O’Connor should recuse himself given Musk’s close ties to both Tesla and X Corp. However, the judge found that Media Matters failed to establish that Tesla has a “financial interest” in X Corp.
In his ruling, Judge O’Connor accused Media Matters of attempting “legal gamesmanship” through its motion to compel his recusal. He said the nonprofit failed to demonstrate how Tesla’s alleged connection to X Corp meets the standard for a financial interest that would require recusal. The judge called the motion an attempt at a “backdoor recusal” and said such tactics were “inappropriate and contrary to the rules” of the court.
As a result of losing the motion, O’Connor ordered Media Matters to pay X Corp’s legal fees associated with responding to the recusal request. Representatives for Media Matters did not comment on the judge’s decision to the New York Post.
The underlying defamation lawsuit was filed by X Corp. against Media Matters last November. X Corp, which was recently acquired by Musk, alleges that Media Matters manufactured images purporting to show hate speech and white nationalism alongside typical X Corp. platform content. X Corp argues this wrongly portrayed the social experience for regular users.
In a separate development, Judge O’Connor recently recused himself from an antitrust lawsuit filed by X Corp. against the World Federation of Advertisers, its now-defunct nonprofit arm GARM and others. He did not provide a reason for his recusal in that case. The New York Post speculates it may have been due to his Unilever stock holdings, one of the companies named in the suit.
In the antitrust case, X Corp accuses the organizations of organizing an illegal boycott to restrict advertising dollars over baseless “brand safety” concerns. The lawsuit followed a Congressional report outlining evidence the groups coordinated to limit ads for various news outlets and platforms. GARM ceased operations earlier this month, citing the cost of its legal defense against X Corp’s claims.
Source: New York Post
