Supporters of Proposition 8, California's voter-approved constitutional
ban on same sex marriages, lost their bid to overturn a previous
decision that the ban violated the United States Constitution.
The supporters alleged that the judge who authored the decision, Chief Judge Vaughn Walker, should not have heard the case because of his involvement in a long-term homosexual relationship, a fact that he revealed after his retirement from the bench.
The current judge presiding over the case ruled against this argument, stating that "it is not reasonable to presume that a judge is incapable of making an impartial decision about the constitutionality of a law, solely because, as a citizen, the judge could be affected by the proceedings."
The supporters alleged that the judge who authored the decision, Chief Judge Vaughn Walker, should not have heard the case because of his involvement in a long-term homosexual relationship, a fact that he revealed after his retirement from the bench.
The current judge presiding over the case ruled against this argument, stating that "it is not reasonable to presume that a judge is incapable of making an impartial decision about the constitutionality of a law, solely because, as a citizen, the judge could be affected by the proceedings."
ShareThis
