Judge who struck down Prop 8 confirms he's gay

Associated Press ^ | April 7, 2011

[Free ThinkerNY]

The federal judge who struck down California's gay marriage ban has confirmed longtime rumors that he's gay, but said his sexuality was irrelevant in deciding the landmark case.

Speaking for the first time about the case since retiring from the bench in February, former Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker said he never considered recusing himself from deciding the constitutionality of Proposition 8 because of his sexual orientation, the San Francisco Chronicle reported.

[NWFLConservative]

"........but said his sexuality was irrelevant in deciding the landmark case"

HE must be EPICALLY STUPID to think that WE are actually stupid enough to believe that BS. More liberal activist judges legislatiing from the bench. He should have immediately recused himself from ruling on this, because he could not possibly be impartial.

[Doc91678]

This guy should have recused himself. Especially since he decided in the manner that he did.

[SandRat]

The federal judge who struck down California's gay marriage ban has confirmed longtime rumors that he's gay, but said his sexuality was irrelevant in deciding the landmark case.R-I-G-H-T ... and there really is an Easter Bunny and a Tooth Fairy.

[ought-six]

No surprise.

[Charles Henrickson]

"Oh, I've had such a morning in the High Court. I could stamp my little feet. . . ."

[DJ MacWoW]

Liberals Have Plans To Indoctrinate Our Children

Stop Them

Click The Pic

Become A Monthly Donor

[BobL]

If he had ruled AGAINST gay marriage, then his sexuality would not have been an issue.

But that didn’t happen.

[Spruce]

Impropriety. Fail.

[Psycho_Bunny]

"Walker said he never considered recusing himself from deciding the constitutionality of Proposition 8 because of his sexual orientation"

If he never even considered it, he was a pathetically horrible judge.

[trumandogz]

“This guy should have recused himself. Especially since he decided in the manner that he did.”

Should Thurgood Marshall or Justice Thomas recused theirself from cases that had to do with civil rights or Affrimitive Action?

Should Sandra Day O’Conner recused herself from cases that had to do with women?

Should the current Catholic Justices recuse themselves from cases dealing with abortion?

[denydenydeny]

Two words: forum shopping.

I don’t think it’s a coincidence that this particular case came before this particular judge.

[hal ogen]

This judge has no integrity and is unethical...but then, he IS “gay”.

[vetvetdoug]

Its hard to concentrate about serious issues when you are sitting upon a live gerbil.

[Calusa]

Vaughn like Justice Souter were liberal sleeper cells both named by G.H.W Bush. Call him and his family RINOs or just country club Republicans they left a trail of wreckage to establish their bona fides before the NYT. No wonder they dumped on Sarah from their high and mighty perch. And , yeah, voted for all of them, but I’m glad their dynasty is history and the GOP is getting an infusion of new blood.

[Guenevere]

Not the same!....and you know it

[LibLieSlayer]

He does nasty demented things with other men... unhealthy, unclean things... his judgment is crap... literally.

LLS

[jtal]

Proposition 8 was an amendment to the California Constitution, was it not? So basically the judge ruled that the Constitution can’t be amended?

[popdonnelly]

A violation of judicial ethics. Being gay doesn’t exempt you from the ethics code.

[Trod Upon]

Sure it can be amended—just so long as the amendment is approved by a leftist homosexual judge. What could possibly go wrong under that standard?