Microsoft Judge's Fate Not Surprising

June 29 -- The much-talked-about removal of the federal judge from the remainder of the Microsoft antitrust case comes as no surprise to the legal community.

The U.S. Court of Appeals said it removed Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson from the Microsoft case because of the judge's many controversial statements about the case and the company that have appeared in the media.

"For judges, the appearance of impropriety we just can't have," says Eileen Libby, associate ethics council for the American Bar Association. "The only remedy is having him step down."

Judge Jackson violated various legal codes of conduct by talking to the press about the Microsoft case, often referring to Microsoft executives in disparaging ways, according to the court of appeals ruling. In one instance, the federal judge was quoted in The New Yorker comparing Microsoft chairman and co-founder Bill Gates to Napoleon and calling Microsoft executives immature.

At the time Jackson's comments were published, legal experts predicted that Jackson would pay a hefty price for speaking to the press. George Washington University law professor Bill Kovacic told ABCNEWS in February that Jackson's comments would spell removal from any further part in the case.

"He's not going to have a part in the sequels, he's finished," Kovacic said.

Breaking the Code

Though Microsoft's aggressive courtroom tactics may have irked Judge Jackson, talking about it to the press — especially while the trial is still going on — is a violation of The Code of Conduct for United States Judges.

Adopted in 1973 by the Judicial Conference of the United States, this code prescribes ethical norms to ensure the integrity of the federal judicial system. In making statements to the press, Jackson violated Canon 3A (6), which says judges should avoid public comment on the merits of a pending or impending action.

Jackson also violated Canon 2, which states that a judge should avoid impropriety and the appearance of impropriety in all activities.