Court upholds gay judge's ruling on Proposition 8
June 14th, 2011
04:17 PM ET
10 years ago

Court upholds gay judge's ruling on Proposition 8

(CNN) - A federal judge in San Francisco Tuesday upheld a former colleague's ruling on California's Proposition 8, despite questions raised about Judge Vaughn Walker's ability to impartially decide the controversial question of same-sex marriage.

U.S. District Court Judge James Ware backed the original ruling by Walker that the voter-approved ban on same-sex marriage in the state was unconstitutional.


Filed under: California • Proposition 8
soundoff (21 Responses)
  1. Rick McDaniel

    Sooner or later, the GOP has to stop persecuting the gay community.

    June 14, 2011 04:24 pm at 4:24 pm |
  2. Asq

    This is good news.

    June 14, 2011 04:24 pm at 4:24 pm |
  3. Sniffit

    "Just before retiring from the federal bench this year, Walker revealed he is gay and in a committed relationship, raising ethical questions about whether he should been involved in the case."

    No, that raises ZERO ethical questions about wheher he should have been involved in the more than you could argue that handing the deicision to a straight person would arise analogous ethical questions. Any honest attorney or judge will tell you this. You can just as well argue that a straight judge would have a vested interest in keeping the rights and legal recognition afforded to straight couples away from gay couples in order to maintain the financial and other tangible and intangible advantages it affords him and people with his sexual orientation for purposes of comeptition...because that's what it all comes down to, competition for money, resources, self-declared moral superiority, etc.

    That quote is a prime example of CNN and the "news" media lending legitimacy to batsh-t crazy nonsense by reporting it without question, critical thought or even a scintilla of research and factual context. It treats what is clearly a completely and blatantly ridiculous assertion as though it might have merit and that does EVERYONE a disservice. So I say again: JOURNALISM IS DEAD.

    June 14, 2011 04:27 pm at 4:27 pm |
  4. Mike

    And Supreme Court Justice Thomas should not be able to weigh in on any issue related to affirmative action, because he is black; and Chief Justice Roberts should not be able to issue any decision related to religion, because he is religious.

    June 14, 2011 04:31 pm at 4:31 pm |
  5. gt

    thats not a judge .. thats a person who wants to impose his beliefs on the people who voted in the law , because he didnt like it.. ..go back to traffic court...

    June 14, 2011 04:43 pm at 4:43 pm |
  6. Ed

    Wha'ts the big deal with, Judge Walker revealing he is gay and deciding the case? It happens all the time with straight judges making decisions regarding minorities, women's right, etc. It's just another lame excuse by the anti marriage equality morons are making about marriage equality. This country is suppose to stand for equality for all, but we find ourselves way behind other countries like Canada, England and Holland to name a few. . Equal rights for all. Seperation of Church and State forever!!!

    June 14, 2011 04:43 pm at 4:43 pm |
  7. jackal & jester

    To deny anyone one group of rights that others have, is the first step towards a path of hatred that will cost many lives. I rather have issues like this to be solved with words before blood is shed.

    June 14, 2011 04:51 pm at 4:51 pm |
  8. Charlie Pedersen

    Can a judge, judge? Sure. Can he be wrong? Sure. The only problem here is a deviant person (gay) is in charge of making this kind of a decision for society and over-ruling the legislature elected by the people. Now, I don't think legislators are perfect – far from it – but they, at least, are many and represent many people. What gays have always wanted is to be thought of as normal and that isn't going to happen. So, a judge who is gay, maybe should recuse himself in this kind of case.

    June 14, 2011 05:21 pm at 5:21 pm |
  9. Dominican mama 4 Obama

    Can you begin to believe how far they will go with their homophobic CRAP?
    Sniffit already dissected this so that even the reading-impaired could understand, but really, these folk are outrageous!
    Good for the Court for upholding the ruling. It should'nt have been challenged in the first place.
    So much hate everywhere you turn it is sickening.
    Stop the hate.

    June 14, 2011 05:27 pm at 5:27 pm |
  10. Voice of Reason

    This judge should have recused himself. Plain and simple. People will say it has no bearing on the case, and maybe they would be right – if not for one thing: This judge chose to NOT disclose his relationship, and in fact kept it as a secret until AFTER the dust settled. Now, if you havent got anything to hide – why are you hiding?

    That fact is that this judge KNEW that people were going to question his impartiality because of his standing in the case. He DOES have something to gain – the right to marry his partner. And that desirability is apparently what this is all about. It is hypocritical in the extreme. This judge made a calculated strategic move. He put his finger on the scales of justice, and knew exactly what he was doing.

    June 14, 2011 05:34 pm at 5:34 pm |
  11. Sonnie2

    When the final trumpets sound I want to be in that number when the saints go marching in. With that in mind to legislate imorality is not something I do not want on my resamae. Yes I know that the # of God Fearing persons is down and so for persons to do the gay lesbian transgender, crap is being advertised as ok. Just plain sick and sad how low some mortals will go.

    June 14, 2011 05:40 pm at 5:40 pm |
  12. Dominican mama 4 Obama

    @ Sonnie2
    The God that I worship, and will always worship loves and accepts ALL of his children.
    Somewhere in that Holy Book of yours is something about NOT judging lest we be judged, I do believe.

    June 14, 2011 05:48 pm at 5:48 pm |
  13. Ryan NC

    Charlie Pedesen up there should go back to the dark ages where he is from. To me the only deviant is you, but the people of your ilk are less and less, thank goodness, demographics are taking care of them!

    June 14, 2011 06:13 pm at 6:13 pm |
  14. Sniffit

    "This judge chose to NOT disclose his relationship, and in fact kept it as a secret until AFTER the dust settled."

    That's like saying he chose not to disclose that he wears Aquaman underoos under his robe or that he likes Charles in Charge reruns until after the case was over. Irrelevant is irrelevant is irrelevant. Timing doesn't change that fact.

    June 14, 2011 06:17 pm at 6:17 pm |
  15. Marcus

    Charlie Pedersen – bigot much?
    Gays are not sick or pervert or whatever you meant with 'deviant', if you truly believe that somebody can be 'really' 'cured' of it... there's about a dozen phony 'doctors' out there waiting for your support.
    The same sort of argumentation is heard every time a 'black' judge rules against a 'white' plaintiff in favor of a 'black' one...
    Get over it, the simple fact that he is gay doesn't disqualify him to have made his decision, the same could be said about a 'straight' judge by the gays & lesbians out there if the ruling in this case had been for the P8.
    Actually, if the sexuality of somebody could be argued against his/her capacity of making an honest judgement on this case, then WHO would be qualified to make a decision?

    June 14, 2011 08:04 pm at 8:04 pm |
  16. Scott

    It's always amusing to see the bigots on clear claiming that someone the "majority" has the right to votes on the rights of minorities. It doesn't matter what the voters decided - they have no constitutional right to decide the rights of minorities by referendum. It is no different than if they held a vote on slavery before the Civil War. People have certain rights that are granted by the Constitution that aren't subject to the whim of today's majority (a rapidly shrinking one at that). To the other person above, the judge is not deviant and neither are gays. Homophobes are deviants from decency.

    June 14, 2011 09:21 pm at 9:21 pm |
  17. Peter s

    Who cares? lets go a step farther and let everyone marry his/her dog, pig, cow etc!!

    June 14, 2011 10:38 pm at 10:38 pm |
  18. Nightcrawler

    Oh yes it's politically incorrect for you to even THINK that a gay man would be anything but completely impartial when it comes to the civil rights of his own people!! How dare you!!

    Come on ladies, you can be happy that this judge's clearly biased "ruling" was approved by another activist judge so that 1 or 2% of the population can be officially recognized... But don't act like he didn't judge with his heart instead of his brain. It makes you all look ignorant to the extreme. (oh and flame on with your rants about how I'm automatically a homophobe because I don't agree with the way this process went down. That makes you look even more intelligent!

    June 14, 2011 11:20 pm at 11:20 pm |
  19. coloradoDem

    So any man who has ruled about abortion should have his case overturned. Any white judge should have his judgement overturned if he ruled on equal rights. I could go on and on.............................

    June 15, 2011 12:15 am at 12:15 am |
  20. MartinP

    @Plain and Simple: Please read Sniffet's post. Straight Judges have the same things to gain from this decision. Additionally, you have no facts to back up your theory that a) the judge even wants to marry his partner; or b) that he specifically and intentionally hid his sexual orientation prior to the case. Moreover, he should not have to disclose that he is gay or not; are we now going to ask everyone their sexual orientation prior to every case in order to ascertain any bias that they may have? Are we going to strike jurors who are gay because they may have some bias/love for a gay criminal? Seriously, someone's sexual orientation has NO BEARING ON HOW SOMEONE DOES THEIR JOB. GET OVER IT.

    June 15, 2011 12:49 am at 12:49 am |
  21. peace

    the bible say do not judge anyone. So if gay people want"s to marry than let them. god will judge them not me or you.

    June 15, 2011 05:22 am at 5:22 am |