"It is not reasonable to assume that a judge is incapable of making an impartial decision about the constitutionality of the law, solely because, as a citizen, the judge could be affected by the proceedings," Judge James Ware.
Judge Ware: You can’t simply assume that a judge who takes an oath to uphold the law and judge fairly is incapable of doing so.
**Ruling Expected Within 24 Hours**
San Francisco, CA – Forty-four years and a day after the United States Supreme Court declared marriage “one of the ‘basic civil rights of man,’ fundamental to our very existence and survival” (Loving v. Virginia), opponents of marriage equality today again argued that the rights of marriage should not extend to gay and lesbian couples.
Proponents of Prop. 8 argued that because retired US District Court Judge Vaughn Walker – who ruled Prop. 8 unconstitutional in August 2010 – was (and still is) in a relationship with a man during trial, he could not have been impartial and therefore his ruling should be thrown out.
The American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER), the sole sponsors of Perry v Brown, called the move to disqualify Judge Walker “frivolous,” “offensive” and “deeply unfortunate.”
“The Proponents of Prop. 8 today advocated for a sweeping and completely unsupported standard for disqualification that would preclude hundreds of qualified, fair-minded judges from deciding some of the most important issues facing our country,” said Theodore J. Boutrous Jr., counsel for AFER. “Their standard is intended to, and would, prevent gay, lesbian or bisexual judges from impartially presiding over cases involving the rights of same-sex individuals and couples – an offensive suggestion that has been consistently rejected by the courts in similar cases involving race and sex discrimination.”
US District Court Chief Judge James Ware, who presided over today’s hearing, said that he would issue a decision within the next 24 hours.
Proponents argued that because Judge Walker was in a long-term relationship, then the issue of his intent to marry was applicable. Judge Ware said that there were no facts showing that Judge Walker wanted to get married, other than being in a long-term relationship. After lengthy questioning by Judge Ware, Proponents’ attorney Charles Cooper admitted that if Judge Walker didn’t want to get married, then there would be no bias.
Judge Ware said, “You can’t simply assume that a judge who takes an oath to uphold the law and judge fairly is incapable of doing so.”
Experts, judges and editorial boards have called Proponents’ motion to vacate judgment “preposterous,” a “non-issue,” “desperate,” “unthinkable,” and “the worst legal argument of the year.” Richard Painter, Chief White House Ethics lawyer under President George W. Bush, went so far as to call the motion leading to today’s hearing “frivolous” and “unfortunate.”
A second issue discussed at today’s hearing was in regards to the video recordings of the August 2010 trial. Judge Ware said he would rule on the issue of the release of the videotapes at a later date, but denied Proponent’s request to have Plaintiffs’ return their copy of the trial videotape.
Today, AFER released the names of more than 20,000 individuals who signed a petition advocating for the tapes’ release, noting that Proponents’ fierce determination to shield access to the trial videotapes directly conflicts with this nation’s constitutional commitment to a public and open judicial process.
AFER attorney Boutrous argued that releasing the trial videotapes would demonstrate that Proponents received a very fair trial from Judge Walker.
Responding to today’s hearing, Chad Griffin, AFER Board President noted, “Today’s hearing demonstrated yet again that the Proponents of Prop. 8 are extremists who will stop at nothing to keep committed American couples from marrying. They led a campaign that was homophobic and filled with animus. Just as those who opposed inter-racial marriage forty-four years ago, those who oppose the civil rights of gay and lesbian Americans will too find themselves on the wrong side of history.“
Over the past two years, a series of nationwide polls have recorded a strong shift in public opinion, with recent polls demonstrating that a majority of Americans now favor the freedom to marry for gay and lesbian couples. A Washington Post-ABC News poll in March 2011 revealed that 53% of Americans favor marriage for gay and lesbian couples, while Gallup’s recent annual Values and Beliefs poll showed that more Americans support marriage equality than oppose it.
(article source AFER)
U.S. District Chief Judge James Ware said during a court hearing that there was no evidence that retired Judge Vaughn R. Walker ever wished to marry his partner, a physician.
Sponsors of Proposition 8, the 2008 ballot measure that resurrected a ban on same-sex marriage, argue that Walker’s ruling against the marriage ban should be wiped from the books because his long-term relationship created an interest in the outcome of the case.
(Read the rest here at the LA TIMES)
Judge James Ware proves combative at Proposition 8 Hearing
Ware, who was named chief judge after Judge Vaughn Walker retired earlier this year, quickly put the heat on Charles Cooper, the attorney for Prop. 8 supporters. Ware asked Cooper about recusal rules, and the attorney argued that Judge Walker should have declared that he was in a long-term, same-sex relationship and recused himself from the case.
But Ware didn’t seem to find much credibility in that argument, then asking Cooper how he could know if Judge Walker wanted to overturn Prop. 8 so that he could get married. “You can be in a long-term relationship with it being for the purposes of marriage,” Ware told Cooper.
Cooper replied: “There are platonic friendships that are long-term in nature that do not normally lead to marriage.” Observers in the courtroom burst into laughter.
Ware retorted: “"What fact would you cite to the court that Judge Walker had an interest in changing his relationship [into a marriage]? … to say that he maintained a long-term relationship doesn’t put him in the shoes of what the plaintiffs were doing."
The judge also didn’t seem to buy into the argument that a gay judge had any more bias than a straight judge. He asked Cooper if a judge who had been sexually assaulted would be required to disclose her victim status in a case involving rape.
Theodore Boutrous Jr., attorney for the American Foundation for Equal Rights (AFER), which is leading the fight against Prop. 8, told Judge Ware that the motion was frivolous.
Boutrous said the motion targets Judge Walker’s sexual orientation and stereotypes by saying the Walker’s romantic relationship is indistinguishable from that of other gay people. He also said it was widely known that Walker was gay, but was never made an issue by Prop. 8 supporters during the initial trial.
(Read the rest @ the San Diego Gay & Lesbian News)
U.S. District Chief Judge James Ware, who is deciding a request by backers of Proposition 8 to throw out last August’s ruling against the ballot measure, said he would try to issue a ruling in the next 24 hours.
“This is the first case where a same-sex relationship is the subject for disqualifying a judge, so it is important that we treat it seriously and get it right,” Ware said.
Ware did not disclose how he would rule, but many of his comments during arguments suggested he would rule that retired Judge Vaughn R. Walker was not required to step aside when he was assigned to hear the Proposition 8 challenge.
(Read the rest again @ LA TIMES)
Should the federal judge who struck down Proposition 8 have his ruling nullified because he's in a relationship with a man? The easy answer is no. This is just a variation on the argument that Judge Vaughn R. Walker should have recused himself from the case because he's gay. It's no more valid than the first argument.But the conservatives challenging Walker's role in the case are, ironically, drawing on a theory of diversity more often heard from liberals. The argument goes something like this: Having a judge who is African American or a woman or a "wise Latina" changes the way justice is administered. Life experience, in this view, is a valuable credential.
(Read the rest here @ LA TIMES)
Chief U.S. District Judge James Ware heard the case on Monday, taking over since Walker has retired.
Ware, an African-American judge nominated to the bench by George H.W. Bush, sharply questioned Charles Cooper, the attorney defending California's marriage ban.
"If a reasonable person thought a black judge should recuse himself from a civil rights case, that would be sufficient to recuse the judge?" Ware asked.
"No, your honor," Cooper responded.
(Read the rest @ Reuters)
Supporters of Prop 8, who are still fighting a losing battle in the California courts over an unconstitutional law that neither the governor nor the attorney general care to support, are back in federal court today in San Francisco to air their complaints about Judge Vaughn Walker, the man who first ruled that Prop 8 was unconstitutional. Their complaints are that Judge Walker's ruling should be invalidated based on the fact that he had a bias in the case, being himself a gay man who potentially wanted to be legally married; and they have a separate complaint about Walker's use of videos of the trial in public speeches, claiming the video was supposed to be sealed after the trial.
Lawyers for backers of the voter-approved ban asked Chief U.S. District Judge James Ware to vacate a decision issued by his predecessor last year that declared Proposition 8 an unconstitutional violation of gay Californians' civil rights.They maintained that former Chief Judge Vaughn Walker should have recused himself from the case or disclosed his relationship because he and his partner stood to personally benefit from the verdict.
"It now appears that Judge Walker, at the time the complaint was filed and throughout this litigation, occupied precisely those same shoes as the plaintiffs," attorney Charles Cooper said.
Ware sharply questioned Cooper on why he assumed Walker had any intention of getting married just because he was in a decade-old relationship.
(Read the rest @ FORBES)
Same-sex marriage hearing focusing on gay judge
Walker publicly revealed after he stepped down in February that he is in a 10-year relationship with a same-sex partner. Rumors that he was gay had circulated before and after he presided over the Proposition 8 trial in early 2010.
Ted Olson, one of the lawyers for the two same-sex couples who successfully sued to overturn the measure, said he was unaware of any other cases in which a ruling was challenged because of the issuing judge's sexual orientation. He called the move to disqualify Walker frivolous and demeaning and said that expecting judges to reveal parts of their personal lives when hearing gay rights cases would set a dangerous precedent.
"What would a judge do who was Mormon knowing the Mormon Church took such an active role" in campaigning for Proposition 8, Olson asked. "What would a judge who had a nephew or niece or son or daughter who was gay or lesbian do? We have an unlimited number of permutations of what a judge might be asked to disclose."
Many legal scholars have said they do not expect Ware to overturn Walker's decision. They point out that while having a judge's impartiality questioned because he is gay is new territory, efforts to get women judges thrown off gender discrimination cases or Hispanic judges removed from immigration cases have failed.
Nonetheless, in a fundraising appeal to Proposition 8 supporters Friday, Ron Prentice, chairman of the religious coalition that qualified the gay marriage ban for the November 2008 ballot, said, "We are much more hopeful for success with a judge presiding over the case who has greater respect for legal precedent and the rule of law."
With marriage equality at the forefront of minds in New York and across the country, HRC has unveiled our latest collaboration with highly esteemed designer and longtime activist Kenneth Cole in support of marriage equality. “I’ve always believed in the power of matching pairs. I believe in marriage equality,” said Kenneth Cole.Despite tremendous gains and historic highs of public support for marriage equality, 29 states have constitutional amendments prohibiting marriage for same-sex couples and the federal Defense of Marriage Act singles out lawfully married same-sex couples for unequal treatment under federal law.
By supporting fair-minded leaders, mobilizing HRC’s members in support of marriage and relationship recognition initiatives across the country and raising awareness of the discriminatory nature of anti-LGBT amendments and laws, the Human Rights Campaign is working to achieve marriage equality. As part of Kenneth Cole’s unwavering dedication and support for marriage equality, the trendsetting designer participated in and created a video for the New Yorker for Marriage campaign. In addition, Kenneth Cole will be featuring marriage equality displays in 97 stores nationwide during the month of June.
Featuring “Take Your Lover Up the Aisle” – Support Marriage Equality written in Kenneth Cole’s signature conversational text on the front and “Kenneth Cole Supports HRC” on the back, the 100% cotton t-shirt and tank top are made in the USA. Only 500 are available in unisex sizes SM-XXL.
The t-shirt and tank top will be sold exclusively at HRC Stores in Provincetown, MA; San Francisco, CA; Washington, D.C.; and shop.hrc.org and through www.KennethCole.com/TshirtStore. Retailing for $35, 100% of net proceeds will go toward HRC’s fight for LGBT equality.
Part of HRC’s designer collaboration series, Kenneth Cole joins a long list of designers including Marc Jacobs, Michael Kors, Calvin Klein, Perry Ellis, Christian Siriano, Alex & Chloe, Heatherette, Nike and American Apparel who are all committed to pushing equality and fashion forward.
