The federal judge that was set to oversee Disney’s First Amendment lawsuit filed against Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis recused himself from the high-profile case on June 1 after discovering that a “relative within the third degree of relationship” owns Disney stock.
“Upon learning this information, I became obligated to engage in a separate inquiry pursuant to the Code of Conduct for United States Judges to determine if the financial interest of my third-degree relative ‘could be substantially affected by the outcome of [this] proceeding.”
“I have engaged in that inquiry and determined that disqualification from this proceeding is required under the circumstances,” the judge wrote, adding that the “size or dollar amount of the third-degree relative’s financial interest is irrelevant.”
“Given the ambiguous standard I must apply under Canon 3C(1)(d)(iii), as well the number of unknown variables present in this case, I cannot say for sure that the outcome of these proceedings could not substantially affect the value of my family member’s financial interest in The Walt Disney Company, Plaintiff’s parent corporation,” he said.
The case will be reassigned to Judge Allen Winsor, a Trump appointee who defended the former president during his first impeachment trial, according to the docket.
Walker’s Previous Comments Cause Concern
Walker’s decision to recuse himself from the DeSantis-Disney case comes shortly after the Republican governor requested that the judge be disqualified.In the second case, he said, “And then Disney is going to lose its status because—arguably because they made a statement that runs afoul—ran afoul of state policy of the controlling party,” according to the motion.
Disney subsequently opposed the motion, arguing that it was based on a “misapprehension of the law and a misstatement of the facts.”
“The Court did not make any findings about those statements,” they added.
‘Rank Judge-Shopping’
In his decision on Thursday, Walker branded the motion “wholly without merit.”“In fact, I find the motion is nothing more than rank judge-shopping,” he wrote. “However, Defendants did get one thing right. That is, if a judge has doubts over whether disqualification is required, he should resolve those doubts in favor of disqualification.”
“Even though I believe it is highly unlikely that these proceedings will have a substantial effect on The Walt Disney Company, I choose to err on the side of caution—which, here, is also the side of judicial integrity—and disqualify myself. Maintaining public trust in the judiciary is paramount, perhaps now more than ever in the history of our Republic,” the judge concluded.
DeSantis later attempted to strip Disney of its long-standing self-governing power status in Florida, stating that the company should not receive special treatment in the state, and appointed a new board of supervisors.
However, shortly before the board could take over, Disney quietly entered into development and restrictive covenant agreements with Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S. Inc, stripping the new board of its powers.
Disney has argued that the moves by DeSantis are retaliatory and litigation between the company and the Republican governor remains ongoing.