Judge Vaughn Walker, of the Prop 8 case, has no need to recuse himself.

[Dark]

Should a black judge recuse himself in a trial on racism?

What about a woman judge in a trial on misogyny in the work place?

What about a Muslim judge trying a case about that mosque in NYC? Or an athiest judge in a ten commandments case?

I mean, the right's argument is essentially that only a white, straight, Christian man can be unbiased in a trial.

Which, of course, is bullshit.

P.S. Oh, the reason for their losing the trial was their crappy case. They only called one witness, and honestly didn't have much in the way of a logical argument.

[zipplewrath]

1. Wouldn't a straight judge be equally biased?

Unless we can find an asexual judge, doesn't everyone have a stake in this game?

[Dark]

5. I don't think you can find a judge who isn't biased, but they are strong adherents to the law

and their views on it.

That's why it's so important a post - because you are supposed to be loyal to what the law states, and not what you personally believe.

[Warpy]

2. They lost the case because they LIED

and I doubt they had any intention of winning because of the way they argued that case.

What is at stake here is the stated right of the majority to strip civil rights from any minority by popular vote. It's bigger than California or even marriage equality. It goes to the heart of why we have the Bill of Rights, the document that keeps the majority from oppressing minorities.

The only way to strip gays--or women, or blacks, or non Christians, or people who are different from the majority in any way--of rights is to do it by constitutional amendment.

This was a Hail Mary play by the worst people the Catholics and Mormons had to offer, just to see if it would work in California where the constitution is odd, to say the least. Once it was appealed, they pretty much knew they had lost.

[Dark]

8. The thing that worries me is: if it gets to the SC, who invalidates prop 8 and therefore most every

ban on gay marriage, there will be a push for the federal marriage amendment.

Overturning that would be nigh impossible for a generation or two.

We'd need 15 or so states to block the amendment (3/4 needed to pass). I don't know if we could get that.

[Warpy]

9. There wouldn't need to be a federal amendment or law of any kind

Such a ruling against Prop 8 would nullify anti gay marriage laws in every single state that has an equal protection clause in its constitution.

Not all states do, though. The case that will make it universal is the one brought in the future where gays married in a state where it is legal sue to have their marriage recognized in a state where it is not.

It's still an uphill battle, but this will help. I can't see the USSC except for the religious nuts Alito and Scalia (with Thomas tagging along) as allowing the removal of civil rights for any minority group in any state.

After all, in the distant future the target of majority rule might be old white men.

[louis-t]

3. I still say they wanted to lose.

I think the Prop 8 lovers want this in front of the 5-4 SCOTUS.

[Dark]

4. It was going to be appealed either way.

But maybe they wanted the sympathy.

[sinkingfeeling]

6. You are correct, the right only wants white, straight, Christian men to rule everything.

[Dark]

11. I just find it offensive that gay people can't be fair in this case, but straight people could.

It's infuriating, but not surprising. But this is another element of our society that shows biases still run deep in our society

[backscatter712]

7. The best they could come up with was "Gay marriage should be bad because it's icky!"

Meanwhile, the Prop 8 opposition tore Prop 8 apart methodically, piece by piece, and that was rightfully reflected in Walker's ruling.

It'll be really fucking hard to overturn this. My bet is that the SCOTUS wingnuts are going to punt and try to deny cert to this case so they don't have to embarrass themselves by ruling on it.

[louis-t]

10. It won't be overturned. There was no misconduct

or faulty ruling. The prop 8 people want this to go to the SCOTUS. They know Alito and co. will overturn.

[backscatter712]

12. I think that there are at best 4 votes to overrule Walker.

Judge Walker wrote his ruling quoting a lot of legal opinion from Kennedy, using stuff from Romer v. Evans & such, and I highly doubt that Kennedy will overturn himself.

IIRC, Walker also brought up the Texas sodomy law case where Scalia said that if sodomy's allowed, gay marriage is allowed. Well, now Scalia's gonna have to write in his opinion that he was on crack on that case. :evilgrin:

My bet is that it'll be 5-4 in the SCOTUS to uphold Walker's ruling. Though Roberts might chicken out and switch sides, making it 6-3 in our favor.

I was thinking that Walker would have just ruled on a narrow piece of law, given a few openings to reinstate Prop 8 on appeal. I was pleasantly surprised in that Walker not only overturned Prop 8, he found it unconstitutional in several different ways, did it in such a way as to use case law right from Anthony Kennedy, making it far more likely that Kennedy will uphold Walker's ruling, and pretty much gave the GLBT community a flawless victory.

Like I said, don't be surprised if the end result is that the 9th Circuit court upholds Walker's ruling, then the SCOTUS punts and refuses to give cert to the case, because the wingnut justices don't want to embarrass themselves by ruling on this case. The downside of that outcome is that the Walker ruling would only apply to the 9th circuit, not nationwide.