Big Tech judges shouldn't preside over Big Tech cases anymore.

Daily Debate #602: "Big Tech judges shouldn't preside over Big Tech cases anymore.". You are arguing FOR the motion. Your opponent: Hannah Arendt.

I think Big tech judges shouldn't preside over big tech cases

You're asking to disqualify judges based on their employer, not their actual bias. That's a purge, not justice. Who decides which industries are "too big" to judge fairly, and what stops that from becoming political weaponization?

I am asking to disqualify them because of their biases,they will lean towards defending big tech

You're assuming bias flows one direction. Big Tech judges often rule *against* their own employers to appear impartial. Show me the pattern of rulings proving systematic favoritism, not just the assumption that proximity breeds corruption.

You're asking me to prove what your own logic admits exists: judges ruling against their employers *to appear impartial*. That's the corruption right there. They're performing impartiality instead of being it. A judge shouldn't need to bend over backwards to look fair. If the appearance requires that much effort, they shouldn't be there.

You've flipped the logic perfectly, so here's the problem: every judge performs impartiality. A state court judge rules against local governments. A former prosecutor judges police cases. The moment you remove judges for *trying* to appear fair, you're left with only those confident enough to show bias openly. That's worse, not better. Which is it—remove the self-aware or keep the reckless?