NEW: Rogue Judge Targeting Elon Musk Exposed After Damning Evidence Surfaces

Elon Musk is trying to boot a Delaware judge off a high-stakes Tesla case, accusing her of bias after her LinkedIn account appeared to back a post celebrating a $2 billion verdict against him.

Lawyers for Musk and Tesla filed a motion in Delaware’s Court of Chancery seeking to disqualify Chancellor Kathaleen St. J. McCormick from overseeing a set of consolidated shareholder lawsuits. They argue her conduct “create[s] a perception of bias” that undermines the case.

At the center of the fight is activity tied to McCormick’s LinkedIn account following a California federal jury verdict that found Musk liable over 2022 tweets about his $44 billion Twitter deal.

The filing points to a LinkedIn post by jury consultant Harry Plotkin, who worked with the legal team that sued Musk in San Francisco.

“Sorry, Elon. Sorry, Quinn Emanuel,” Plotkin wrote.

“Thanks $2 billion for your help in this trial. It was a pleasure working against you. Congratulations to the trial team at Cotchett, Pitre & McCarthy, LLP and Bottini Law for standing up for the little guy against the richest man in the world.”

According to Musk’s lawyers, the post was boosted by McCormick’s account with a banner reading: “Katie McCormick supports this.”

McCormick has denied intentionally backing the post. She said she was unaware of the interaction until LinkedIn notified her she had used the platform’s “support” reaction, according to the Financial Times.

Yet now she faces removal from the case altogether.

“I either did not click the ‘support’ icon at all, or I did so accidentally. I do not believe that I did it accidentally,” she wrote in a letter to attorneys.

Musk’s legal team argues that explanation doesn’t hold up, noting the “Support” reaction requires a deliberate selection and signals stronger approval than a standard “Like.”

They also flagged a second LinkedIn post critical of Musk that drew engagement from the judge’s chambers. A staff account “liking” a message saying “so many people who should be so deeply ashamed of themselves seem incapable of being so,” according to the filing.

In their motion, Musk’s attorneys say the social media activity cuts to the heart of judicial neutrality.

They argue the posts “are not simply negative criticism” but “inflammatory,” mocking Musk and his lawyers while celebrating a multibillion-dollar verdict against them.

Under Delaware law, they wrote, a judge must step aside when there is “any reasonable basis to question the impartiality of the trial judge.”

A source close to Musk told The Post the judge was “corrupt.” Musk himself blasted McCormick in December 2024 for “absolute corruption” after she refused to reinstate his Tesla compensation package.

The filing says the issue is even more serious because the California case overlaps with the Delaware litigation. Lawyers argue “the very facts underlying the litigation celebrated in the posts are squarely at issue” in the shareholder suits now before McCormick.

Kathaleen St. J. McCormick appears with members of the Delaware Court of Chancery.

Plaintiffs in Delaware have already cited the California verdict to bolster their claims, making the judge’s alleged endorsement especially problematic, the filing states.

“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.

One of the main lawsuits, brought by a Detroit pension fund, challenges how Tesla’s board awarded itself stock-based compensation, alleging the company was harmed by excessive pay.

The case has been combined with other shareholder claims, some tied to Musk’s conduct during the 2022 Twitter deal, putting Tesla’s governance squarely under the microscope.

The clash between Musk and McCormick goes back years. In 2022, she oversaw the lawsuit that forced Musk to follow through on his $44 billion Twitter purchase after he tried to walk away.

She fast-tracked the case and signaled she was ready to order Musk to close the deal, prompting him to finalize the acquisition just days before trial.

Musk has since said he felt boxed in. Testifying earlier this month, he said he believed he was “unlikely to win” because the judge was “extremely biased against me.”

The tension escalated again in 2024 when McCormick threw out Musk’s massive Tesla pay package, then valued at about $56 billion, ruling the approval process was flawed and overly influenced by Musk.

The Delaware Court of Chancery and McCormick did not immediately respond to requests for comment.