— Elon Musk (@elonmusk) December 2, 2024 They say the judge’s alleged reaction creates an unavoidable appearance of bias under Delaware law, which requires recusal where there is “any reasonable basis to question the impartiality of the trial judge.” A source close to Musk alleged to The Post that the judge was “corrupt.” In December 2024, Musk hit out at McCormick for her “absolute corruption” when she declined to reinstate his Tesla compensation package. The problem, they argue, is compounded by the overlap between the federal case and the Delaware proceedings, noting that “the very facts underlying the litigation celebrated in the posts are squarely at issue” in the shareholder lawsuits now before McCormick. Plaintiffs in the Delaware case have already pointed to the California ruling to support their claims — making the judge’s alleged endorsement of that outcome especially problematic, according to the filing. “The Court’s support of posts about a ‘pending… proceeding’” in another jurisdiction, the lawyers wrote, “runs afoul” of judicial conduct rules barring public comment on active cases. Chancellor Kathaleen St. J. McCormick appears with members of the Delaware Court of Chancery in this undated file photo. Delaware Court of Chancery McCormick is currently presiding over consolidated shareholder derivative lawsuits accusing Musk and Tesla’s board of breaching fiduciary duties, including claims tied to executive compensation and corporate governance. One of the central cases — brought by a Detroit pension fund — challenges how Tesla’s directors awarded themselves stock-based pay, alleging the company was harmed by excessive compensation. The litigation has been consolidated with related shareholder claims, some of which also touch on Musk’s conduct during the 2022 Twitter deal, putting multiple aspects of Tesla’s governance under scrutiny. The clash between Musk and McCormick dates back to 2022, when she presided over the blockbuster lawsuit that forced him to complete his $44 billion acquisition of Twitter. McCormick previously presided over the case that forced Musk to complete his $44 billion Twitter deal. REUTERS McCormick put the case on a fast track and signaled she was prepared to order Musk to close the deal — a pressure campaign that ended with the billionaire backing down and finalizing the purchase just days before trial. Musk has since made clear he blames the Delaware court for that outcome, testifying earlier this month that he believed he was “unlikely to win” because the judge was “extremely biased against me.” Tensions escalated further in 2024 when McCormick voided Musk’s massive Tesla pay package — then valued at roughly $56 billion — finding the process that approved it was deeply flawed and overly influenced by Musk himself. The Post has sought comment from the Delaware Court of Chancery and McCormick. Filed under