Prop 8 trial judge is gay – will it stay a non-issue?

[WillParkinson]

Prop 8 trial judge is gay – will it stay a non-issue?

I didn’t see this coming. Turns out that it’s an open secret in San Francisco that Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker – the guy deciding the Prop 8 trial – is gay.

This is a non-issue, or it should be. After all, hundreds of cases about heterosexual relationships and rights are decided by straight judges every day. But that it made the San Francisco Chronicle at all (albeit in a positive opinion column) suggests that it’s not a non-issue at all, even though the case was assigned to him at random. And I wonder, if Walker decides in our favor, what the reaction of the Right will be.

Not pleasant, I imagine.

From the Chronicle:

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.

http://www.365gay.com/news/prop-8-trial-judge-is-gay-will-it-stay-a-non-issue/

[wtmusic]

1. Fortunately these cases are decided by humans, not computers

and Judge Walker will bring his wealth of life experience to bear on his decision. That's a vital issue, and ultimately good for everyone.

[xchrom]

2. Depends on how he decides.

Conservatives will use this ammo after.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

3. because naturally straights have no bias...

ugh. i hate the world

[joeybee12]

5. Striaght white men don't...you saw that in the hearings for Sotomayor...

...can her background influence her? Yeah, like you said, only the strauight white men come from an unbiased background and what they see is the standard from which the rest of us must try to adhere to.

[TheWraith]

4. HAHAHAHAHAHA (deep breath) HAHAHAHAhahahahahahahaha...

Karma.

[Smarmie Doofus]

6. He should recuse himself.

A closeted Bush appointee, presumably republican, with a history of litigation against the gay community. This does NOT portend a good outcome.

His sexual orientation... rather , his *political* orientation toward his sexual orientation ... suggests he can't be objective.

I'd rather take my chances with the with the next number up.






>>>>>>Many San Francisco gays still hold Walker in contempt for a case he took when he was a private attorney, when he represented the U.S. Olympic Committee in a successful bid to keep San Francisco's Gay Olympics from infringing on its name.

"Life is full of irony," the judge replied when we reminded him about that episode.

And did he have any concerns about being characterized as gay?

"No comment."

Shortly after our conversation, we heard from a federal judge who counts himself as a friend and confidant of Walker's. He said he had spoken with Walker and was concerned that "people will come to the conclusion that (Walker) wants to conceal his sexuality."

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/02/07/BACF1BT7ON.DTL#ixzz0ezAeTkmq>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

[Djarun]

7. sweetie sweetie sweetie, don't worry. Whatever the outcome of this "trial"

will be, it will surely be put into the dusty laps of the Supreme Court. At this point gay Americans have less rights of person-hood than corporations do. I am sure it is an oversight due to Dementia, and the judges were confused and voted the opposite of what they meant to vote, kinda like "yes for marriage" really meant no for gay marriage. Makes perfect cent$ to me!

[TheWraith]

9. A bit heavy on the sarcasm, but an excellent point...

The results of this first trial are borderline irrelevant, which is why it's hard to get worked up over them. This is going to spend a long time climbing the federal court food chain.

[ruggerson]

8. yes, it will