Tesla CEO Elon Musk’s legal team has made a bold move by filing a motion demanding that Delaware Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick disqualify herself from an ongoing high-stakes Tesla shareholder lawsuit. This development comes after an apparent LinkedIn “support” reaction from McCormick’s account to a post celebrating a $2 billion jury verdict against Musk in a separate California securities-fraud case.
The tension between Musk, Tesla, and the Delaware judiciary has been simmering for some time, with McCormick previously presiding over the landmark challenge to Musk’s record $56 billion 2018 compensation package. In a LinkedIn post by Harry Plotkin, a Southern California jury consultant involved in a case against Musk over tweets about his Twitter acquisition, McCormick’s account was seen giving a strong endorsement by using the platform’s heart-in-hand “support” icon. Musk’s legal team argues that this action creates a perception of bias against him and calls for McCormick’s immediate recusal to maintain judicial impartiality.
McCormick quickly denied any intentional endorsement, stating that she was unaware of the interaction until LinkedIn notified her. She claimed that she either did not click the “support” icon at all or did so accidentally, although she does not believe it was accidental. Critics, including Musk allies, find this explanation implausible given the deliberate interface of the platform.
The stakes are high due to McCormick’s central role in the Tesla pay-package litigation. In a previous case, she ruled the 2018 performance-based stock-option grant, potentially worth $56 billion at the time, was invalid. McCormick found that Musk had too much control over Tesla as a controlling stockholder, the board lacked independence, and shareholder disclosures were deficient. She ordered full rescission of the deal, a remedy she described as necessary to deter fiduciary breaches.
Following the ruling, Tesla shareholders ratified the package a second time, but McCormick rejected this in December 2024, stating that post-trial votes could not cure defects. The Delaware Supreme Court later reversed the rescission remedy but largely upheld McCormick’s liability findings, awarding the plaintiff nominal damages and reduced attorneys’ fees.
The current recusal motion brings more scrutiny to judicial social-media activity and could impact corporate migration out of Delaware. Musk moved Tesla’s incorporation to Texas after the initial ruling, sparking a debate over Delaware’s specialized courts for corporate governance disputes. The decision on the recusal motion is imminent, highlighting the delicate balance between judicial independence and public confidence in high-profile litigation.