A bombshell report on Tuesday named two federal judges in Colorado among the more than 130 nationwide who oversaw cases involving companies in which they or their families owned stock.
The Wall Street Journal reported that U.S. District Court Judge R. Brooke Jackson had 36 conflicts of interest and Senior Judge Lewis T. Babcock had one.
Federal law requires judges to recuse themselves in cases where they, their spouse or a minor child who is living with them has a financial interest in the dispute or in one of the parties to the proceedings. The law also mandates that a judge "inform himself about his personal and fiduciary financial interests," as well as those of his immediate family.
Jackson, a 2011 appointee of the Obama administration, initially told the WSJ he "preferred to stay unknowledgeable" about his and his wife's investments, under the theory that he could not have a conflict of interest if he did not know about the stock portfolio. However, Jackson later realized he was wrong about what the law required.
"I am embarrassed that I did not properly understand and apply the stock ownership rule," he wrote in a 21-page letter to the WSJ. "Being informed of what could be viewed as an ethical violation, even a technical one, is no fun."
Colorado Politics requested the letter from Jackson's chambers, but received no response.
The 36 cases the judge participated in, despite holding stock in a party to the proceedings, included disputes featuring Apple, Chevron, Eli Lilly, Facebook, Home Depot, Wells Fargo and other major corporations.
Jeffrey P. Colwell, the clerk of the district court, said all judges prior to their service are asked for a "conflicts list" that includes their investments. Staff upload the data into the electronic case assignment system, and remind judges to update the lists when necessary.
"Judge Jackson has provided us a list and it has been inputted," said Colwell following the WSJ report.
Babcock participated in a case involving Comcast while holding between $15,001 and $50,000 of company stock.
"I dropped the ball," Babcock, a Reagan administration appointee, told the WSJ. Andrew J. O’Connor of Lafayette, who was one of the parties in the Comcast case, authored a complaint against Babcock alleging judicial misconduct after news broke of the judge's investment.
Chris Wolpert, the clerk of the other federal court in Colorado, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit, told Colorado Politics he was confident in the institution's efforts to identify potential grounds for recusal.
"We have a robust process that leverages automated systems to scan electronic dockets at appropriate times throughout the life of an appeal to identify individuals and entities that might raise recusal concerns for our judges," Wolpert said. "Every day, a member of my staff reviews possible conflicts identified by our automated processes, and we seek input from judges as necessary to determine whether a possible recusal concern is an actual conflict."
In addition to statutory guidance, the code of conduct for federal judges also requires judges to disqualify themselves "in any proceeding in which the judge has a financial interest, however small."
"had" - Google News
September 29, 2021 at 04:31AM
https://ift.tt/3oi1clg
Report: 2 federal Colorado judges had financial stake in cases, failed to recuse - coloradopolitics.com
"had" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2KUBsq7
https://ift.tt/3c5pd6c
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Report: 2 federal Colorado judges had financial stake in cases, failed to recuse - coloradopolitics.com"
Post a Comment