"If this is true, this is unacceptable behavior for a federal court judge," she said in a statement.
Judges are people, they do tend to engage in sexual activity once in a while. They even have genitalia.
The judge is presiding over an obscenity case.
The judge had a site that had some porn on it that he didn't successfully prevent the public from viewing.
Those two situations have nothing to do with each other and are not a conflict of interest. (depending on the nature of the photos)
Obscenity does not automatically equal porn. Even weird or funny porn, even fetish porn is not necessarily legally obscene.
If the pictures he posted would fit the legal definition of obscene then a case could be made for a conflict of interest.
If he was part owner of a movie studio specializing in shock and sick movies, including horror movies with a lot of gore, that doesn't mean he would have a conflict of interest in a case involving snuff films.
If he owned a restaurant would he have a conflict of interest in a case involving a restaurant that served outdated food (provided his restaurant didn't compete with the one being charged)]]>