A Texas judge assigned to two cases involving Elon Musk’s X platform has recused himself from one of the cases shortly after it was revealed that he owns Tesla shares.

The report raises questions about O’Connor’s impartiality and X’s motivations for filing the lawsuits in that court. NPR reported that unlike many other courts that randomly assign judges, the federal court in North Texas assigns cases to judges based on the division in which they are filed. That gives plaintiffs an unusual level of certainty about who is likely to hear their case. X and the defendants in the lawsuits are not based in Texas, although Musk recently said he plans to move the seat there. X did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Critics have accused X of seeking a convenient venue or looking for a sympathetic judge or district to try its lawsuits. Their argument is bolstered by the fact that antitrust experts say X will have a hard time proving that the advertisers’ boycott violates the law. Former Justice Department antitrust chief Bill Baer told the BBC that “a politically motivated boycott is generally not a violation of antitrust law. It is protected speech under our First Amendment to the Constitution.”

Musk’s lawsuits have already enabled opponents to pay legal fees. The Global Alliance for Responsible Media (GARM), an advertising coalition of the World Federation of Advertisers (WFA), which is a defendant in X’s lawsuit, is said to have dissolved in the course of the lawsuit. Business Insider reported that the group felt it had to use its limited resources to fight the lawsuit.