Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Judge’s Partner Cited As Grounds For Prop. 8 Appeal

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU
 
Kadie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 07:28 PM
Original message
Judge’s Partner Cited As Grounds For Prop. 8 Appeal
Judge’s Partner Cited As Grounds For Prop. 8 Appeal
April 25, 2011 4:56 PM

SAN FRANCISCO (CBS/AP) – The sponsors of California’s same-sex marriage ban have said the recent disclosure by the federal judge who struck down Proposition 8 that he is in a long-term relationship with another man has given them new grounds to appeal.

Lawyer Andy Pugno told The Associated Press on Monday that backers of the voter-approved measure believe that Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker should have removed himself from the case because his impartiality could “reasonably” be questioned.

“Only if Chief Judge Walker had unequivocally disavowed any interest in marrying his partner could the parties and the public be confident that he did not have a direct personal interest in the outcome of the case,” attorneys for the coalition of religious and conservative groups that put Proposition 8 on the November 2008 ballot wrote.

They are now asking the judge who inherited the case when Walker retired at the end of February to vacate Walker’s August 2010 decision. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals already is reviewing the legal merits of Walker’s ruling at the request of Proposition 8′s proponents.


more...
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2011/04/25/judges-part... /




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
mike_c Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 07:33 PM
Response to Original message
1. only if the Prop 8 proponents have "unequivocally disavowed any interest in marrying..."
...anyone else does this argument even begin to make any sort of twisted sense. If being homosexual and wanting to marry is a conflict of interest in a definition of marriage case, then being heterosexual and wanting to marry creates the same conflict.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Apr-25-11 08:05 PM
Response to Original message
2. Straight husbands, straight wives? Anyone? Nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Oct 31st 2014, 05:01 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » General Discussion Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC