![](https://programming.dev/pictrs/image/605bea63-4da9-4dd4-a72c-f65d32ebea70.png)
![](https://fry.gs/pictrs/image/c6832070-8625-4688-b9e5-5d519541e092.png)
The mathematical proof is that Elon owns several hundred million Tesla shares and his holding or selling of those shares will impact the share price of the judge’s shares. Up or down, the price will be impacted, that’s just how markets work. If he is forced to sell those shares to fund X, the judge will be impacted.
Also, you shouldn’t really need an exact proof for the judge’s recusal. There is a chance he is impacted by the result of the case in a significant monetary way, so why not pass the case to a judge who doesn’t have these connections. This isn’t the last judge in Texas (just one of the most partisan) so there is far greater upsides to recusal than downsides.
Why risk the optics of impropriety when you don’t have to?
Yeah the news of this non-recusal came too soon after the other recusal. Very confusing timeline if you didn’t know there were two cases