^{Photo: New York Post}

Elon Musk is pushing for a judge in Delaware’s Court of Chancery to recuse herself from two ongoing shareholder lawsuits involving Tesla, citing concerns over perceived bias. Musk’s legal team claims that Judge Kathaleen McCormick may have shown partiality after allegedly reacting with an emoji to a LinkedIn post mocking him.

The post in question referenced a San Francisco federal court verdict that could potentially cost Musk more than $2 billion, related to allegations that he defrauded Twitter investors during his acquisition of the social network. In their motion filed Wednesday, Musk’s attorneys wrote that the cases should be reassigned to a randomly selected judicial officer to preserve impartiality.

Judge McCormick responded, stating she had not read the full LinkedIn post, did not intend to signal support, and may have accidentally clicked the reaction. She also reported the incident to LinkedIn for “suspicious activity” on her account. Musk’s legal team, including Quinn Emanuel partner Alex Spiro, has sought clarification from LinkedIn but questioned the explanation that it was a technical glitch.

The dispute adds another layer to a longstanding tension between Musk and Delaware courts. McCormick previously ordered Tesla to rescind Musk’s 2018 CEO pay package, valued at roughly $56 billion in stock options, in the shareholder case Tornetta v. Musk. While Delaware’s Supreme Court later restored the package in 2025, ruling that the initial remedy was excessive, Musk has since relocated several of his businesses, including Tesla, to Texas and Nevada, citing dissatisfaction with Delaware’s corporate governance.

The two ongoing cases involve Tesla director compensation and a consolidated shareholder lawsuit alleging that Musk breached fiduciary duties by starting xAI, a potential competitor to Tesla in artificial intelligence. Earlier this year, Tesla invested $2 billion into xAI, which was later acquired by Musk’s aerospace and defense company SpaceX, converting Tesla stock holdings into SpaceX shares.

These developments underscore the heightened scrutiny Musk faces in Delaware courts, where his business decisions and compensation arrangements continue to provoke debate over executive accountability and investor rights. As legal battles continue, the question of judicial impartiality could influence not only the outcome of these suits but also the broader perception of corporate governance in high-profile U.S. companies.