As you likely know, a judge in Louisiana issued an injunction against the Obama administration's drilling moratorium.
But that judge was breaking the law.
It's a simple thing. It's a federal law that says a judge has to recuse him or herself when they have a financial interest in the subject matter of the case.
Our friends at BPdestroyed the Gulf with their .negligence. After some dithering about, Obama tried to fend off the criticism by making a few photo opps down in Louisiana. When that didn't succeed, he said a few populist things, and finally, slapped a moratorium on deep-sea drilling.
But then enter Judge Martin C. Feldman. Martin owns a whole lot of oil and oil-exploration stock. And he got to decide if the Obama administration's deep-water drilling moratorium should stay in place. He said no. Surprised?
Problem is, there's this pesky little law that says a judge is supposed to recuse him or herself if they have some kind of financial stake in what's going on in the case. The law is 28 USC 455. The link is here. This is the text:
(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate of the United States shall
disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality
might reasonably be questioned.
(b) He shall also disqualify himself in the following circumstances:
(1) Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a
party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts concerning
the proceeding;
(2) Where in private practice he served as lawyer in the
matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom he previously
practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning
the matter, or the judge or such lawyer has been a material
witness concerning it;
(3) Where he has served in governmental employment and
in such capacity participated as counsel, adviser or material witness
concerning the proceeding or expressed an opinion concerning
the merits of the particular case in controversy;
(4) He knows that he, individually or as a fiduciary, or his
spouse or minor child residing in his household, has a financial
interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the
proceeding, or any other interest that could be substantially affected
by the outcome of the proceeding;
. . .
(c) A judge should inform himself about his personal and fiduciary
financial interests, and make a reasonable effort to inform
himself about the personal financial interests of his spouse and
minor children residing in his household.
So, Martin broke the law. Think he'll get in trouble? There's no penalties in Sec. 455, but there is the possibility his ruling could get tossed on appeal under FRCP Rule 60(b).