Most Read
    Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

    Going After Judge James Ware

    Going After Judge James Ware

    A motion has been filed in California federal District Court seeking to vacate former Chief Judge Vaughn Walker’s ruling holding that Prop. 8 violated the United States Constitution.  A copy of the motion is here.  As a matter of routine, the movants selected a hearing date for the motion in July before Chief Judge James Ware, who replaced Judge Walker on the case.

    The motion argues that Judge Walker’s recent announcement that he has been in a committed homosexual relationship for the past 8 years gave Judge Walker an interest in the outcome of the Prop. 8 ruling.  The movants argue that such interest combined with evidence of actual bias, including Judge Walker’s highly unusual procedural rulings in the trial whcih led among other things to a rare rebuke by the U.S. Supreme Court, demonstrated a conflict of interest which should have led Judge Walker to recuse himself from the case.

    The motion is low percentage, in my estimation.  Nonetheless, the motion presents important issues which need to be addressed promptly because the outcome of the motion could affect pending appellate proceedings in the California Supreme Court and 9th Circuit, so Judge Ware moved the hearing up from July to mid-June.

    That has led to accusations by a completely misinformed Teddy Partridge at Firedoglake that Judge Ware is homophobic and should be taken off the case, Federal Judge Invites Rank Bigotry Into 9th Circuit [sic] Courtroom:

    This is rank bigotry on the part of Judge Ware, and can only be justified by the federal court system’s consideration of gay people as second-class citizens. It is shameless prejudice. No heterosexual judge would be held to any similar standard regarding her own long-term, committed relationship. No plaintiff would dare question the bona fides of a straight judge.

    Gays are second-class in federal court and in America; Judge James Ware just proved the entire point of Perry.

    And no chief judge would consider such a motion about a heterosexual judge, nor would he grant a hearing and request briefs on the topic. It is absurd on its face and should be rejected by the federal court system. Judge Ware should be sanctioned for allowing such rank bigotry a place in his courtroom.

    He should certainly remove himself from any further deliberations regarding the Perry case, as he’s shown himself to hold bigotry in high enough esteem to hear its arguments about a colleague.

    It’s shameful and it shouldn’t be tolerated.

    The comments to Partridge’s post are even more hyperventilated.

    Word to Teddy.  Deciding motions is what Judges do.  The fact that a Judge allows a hearing on a motion, and expedites consideration, does not reflect agreement with the motion.

    If you really want Judge Ware off the case, gets lawyers to make the argument for you.  I think I know a law firm which will do it for free, because things have been slow lately in its Gitmo detainee practice group.

    ——————————————–
    Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
    Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!
    Bookmark and Share

    DONATE

    Donations tax deductible
    to the full extent allowed by law.

    Comments


    I too am tired of the left not at least arguing in context. A recent decision: Thompson v. Connick that was reversed by SCOTUS prompted an equally punk reply at Slate: http://www.slate.com/id/2290036/
    When reviewing the commenters, it appears that none of them read the opinion either.

    Teddy's assertions seem long on emotion and short on legal justification. Color me unconvinced. Besides, it is the 9th Circuit. They are bound to get it wrong. They have a tradition to uphold.

    Well, actually, random string of characters, right now the gay judge and straight judge have the same rights I do. Giving gay judge new rights is a benefit that he can profit from.

    i think what he is saying is that the simple fact that he is even considering it is the bigotry. which is still stupid.

    LC2etc, please, inform all us dumb people. Name the states that prevent a gay man from getting a marriage license under the same rules and guidelines as a straight man. Name the state where the question "Are you gay?" appears on any marriage license.


    Leave a Comment

    Leave a Reply

    You must be logged in to post a comment.

    Notify me of followup comments via e-mail (or subscribe without commenting.)

    Font Resize
    Contrast Mode
    Send this to a friend