Sunday, February 7, 2010

No Bias Here: Prop. 8 Trial Judge Vaughn Walker is Gay

First of all, I DON'T ENDORSE THE CONTENTS OF THE SIGNS AT THE IMAGE BELOW. It's mockery of the hate, and there's more at Laughing Squid, "San Francisco’s Answer to Westboro Baptist Church."

At the same time, I really am MOCKING Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, who's presiding over the Proposition 8 trial in San Francisco. It turns out he's gay, and --- surprise!! --- there are questions of impartiality. See the San Francisco Chronicle, "
Judge Being Gay a Nonissue During Prop. 8 Trial" (via Memeorandum):

The biggest open secret in the landmark trial over same-sex marriage being heard in San Francisco is that the federal judge who will decide the case, Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, is himself gay.

Many gay politicians in San Francisco and lawyers who have had dealings with Walker say the 65-year-old jurist, appointed to the bench by President George H.W. Bush in 1989, has never taken pains to disguise - or advertise - his orientation.

They also don't believe it will influence how he rules on the case he's now hearing - whether Proposition 8, the 2008 ballot measure approved by state voters to ban same-sex marriage, unconstitutionally discriminates against gays and lesbians.

"There is nothing about Walker as a judge to indicate that his sexual orientation, other than being an interesting factor, will in any way bias his view," said Kate Kendell, head of the National Center for Lesbian Rights, which is supporting the lawsuit to overturn Prop. 8.
Yeah. Right.

See Ed Whelan, "Judge Walker’s Skewed Judgment."

RELATED: Michelle Malkin instead, "
The Anti-Prop. 8 Mob Strikes Again."


Jordan said...

Five bucks that the Left says the exposing of Judge Walker's sexuality is bigoted McCarthyism with a tinge of Nazism for kicks.

The Griper said...

the problem with the accusation of bias is the fact it can be used as a charge in the opposite situation also with a heterosexual judge. bias is a no-win situation here.

Tracy Coyle said...

Are you suggesting we need a eunic to decide the case because a gay judge would be prejudicial to the straight point of view and by inference, a straight judge would be prejudicial to the gay point of view?

Or maybe, he is a good judge that rules on law, rather than on feelings?

Or are you suggesting gays are too emotional to be objective?


Ifechukwude Nwadiwe said...

the griper and tracy took the words right out of my mouth. I believe to be a Judge the ability to be unbiased is a requirement. Of course this isn't always te case, but automatically jumping to the conclusion that he is biased is not the route we should be taking either.