Skip to comments.Judge to announce Prop 8 stay ruling
Posted on 08/11/2010 9:53:59 PM PDT by DesertRenegade
The judge who threw out California's ban on gay marriage said Wednesday he is prepared to decide whether to stay his ruling pending appeal.
U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker, chief of the court in San Francisco, ruled last week that Proposition 8, adopted by California voters in 2008, is unconstitutional. The court said he plans to issue his decision on a stay Thursday morning.
Walker issued a temporary stay last week. If he decides to keep his ruling from taking effect pending appeal, same-sex couples might be barred from marriage in California for several years, the Los Angeles Times said.
The case is expected to go to the U.S. Supreme Court.
If he can come up with a fig leaf that he thinks will get past the appellates, he jolly well won’t stay it.
Ahnold and Moonbeam both gave him cover.
Consider it lifted.
This judge really opened up a can of worms. What a mess.
This is the problem with having unelected judges.
He is a federal judge. Congress can impeach him, not the “people of California.”
If the people’s will at the polls can be overturned by a Leftist judge, then elections no longer have any meaning.
The only option left for the conservative majority is revolution.
They were talking about this on Fox 11 news here, showed a bunch of gay men kissing each other, made me almost lose my dinner. Of course everyone here in the local media has a huge smile on their face whenever they are discussing the ruling
I know he is not elected, but there must be some mechanism to remove a negligent judge from the bench. If a judge literally loses his mind, can’t they force him to step down?
I sure hope he does not lift that stay as that would open the doors to gay marriage and close the door on Walker’s decision to be overturned.
He WAS politely asked to recuse himself but he declined saying he could render an unbiased opinion. Everyone in California KNEW what his ruling would be. The PEOPLE need to take back our country from people who are unelected, activist and arrogant.
thoth wormth are GAAAAAY!
Internal ethics panels, or if that fails, impeachment.
Who asked him to recuse himself?
The USSC needs to step in an stop this activist fool. Walker needs to be slapped down by his superiors and taught a lesson. He is the quintessential rogue judge.
Psychology and Psychiatry would say the California gay marriage decision was entirely rational.
Judge Vaughn Walker overturned Californias Proposition 8, and found as fact that parent gender was insignificant for raising children, and thereby dismissed one of the arguments made in favor of the ban. This finding relies for foundational scientific credibility on the 1973 decision by the American Psychiatric Association (APA) to remove homosexuality as a mental disorder from its Diagnostic and Statistical Manual (DSM).
Removal followed a two year campaign Newsweek described as ongoing disruptive, chaotic attacks on psychiatrists and physiologists. Yet throughout these attacks, no academic papers were presented at conferences refuting research previously done.
Eventually, the onslaughts forced sufficient abstentions and apprehensive responses for a third of APAs 17,000 plus membership to approve removal. The under-voting and submission to public pressure support an understanding that the DSM is as likely to accumulate political manifestos and marketing brochures as attempts at scientific exposition.
After this decision a task force was established to ensure perpetual sanctity for the APA action. No research papers would again arise to confirm initial therapy success rates of 30% to 60 %, substantiating that 7 of 10 homosexuals could eventually walk away from the lifestyle forever. This task force would set peer review standards mandating pre-ordained theses, acceptable flexibility in research design definitions, and acceptable human data points. Psychology and Psychiatry chose to relinquish scientific rigor for popular societal and political acclaim.
Therefore, Judge Walker could safely reference any number of derivative studies, which find any arrangement of parent sexes provide the same benefit to children, and that any contrary opinion must constitute at least cultural prejudice.
“Ahnold and Moonbeam both gave him cover.”
Ahnold is thinking of Hollywood future, and Moonbeam is thinking of Statehouse future, neither is thinking of US or California future. They both deserve the fate of Sodom and G ....
Well put, my good FRiend.
“The principal cause of child poverty in the U.S. is the absence of married fathers in the home,” Robert Rector, senior research fellow in domestic policy studies at The Heritage Foundation, writes in a new paper. “Marriage is a powerful weapon in fighting poverty. Being married has the same effect in reducing poverty as adding five to six years to a parent’s education level.”
“Research shows that a child raised in a home where Dad is married to Mom is much less likely to live in poverty, get arrested as a juvenile, be suspended or expelled from school, be treated for emotional or behavioral problems, or drop out before completing high school. Taxpayers foot the bill for more than $300 billion a year in means-tested government spending on low-income single moms - and, in relatively rare cases, single dads.”
Same Heritage Foundation article.
And yet, studies of fatherlessness tell a different story. The National Center for Health Statistics has found that children living with divorced mothers are four times more likely to need professional treatment for emotional or behavioral problems, twice as likely to repeat a grade at school, and more likely to suffer chronic asthma, frequent headaches, bedwetting, stammering or speech defects, anxiety, depression or hyperactivity.
Children growing up without dads, according to the Bureau of Justice Statistics, are more likely to be delinquent and twice as likely to end up in prison.
“Church attendance is good for the soul, but a new study by FRC shows that it’s also good for American schools. In a special edition of Dr. Pat Fagan’s Mapping America, Drs. Nicholas Zill and Philip Fletcher found a startling discrepancy between children who live with both biological parents and attend religious services weekly and those from broken homes who worship less frequently.
With data from the National Survey of Children’s Health, Zill and Fletcher found that students from intact, churchgoing families are five times less likely to repeat a grade. Less than a quarter of these parents (21%) were contacted by their child’s school for behavior or achievement problems, compared to 53 percent whose kids were not living with both parents and not attending church services regularly. There was even a noticeable difference in the level of parents’ stress. The more frequently a family worships together, the less anxiety moms and dads report about their kids’ school performance.
Perhaps even more surprising is that these differences held even after controlling for family income and poverty, parents’ education level, race, and ethnicity. As Mapping America illustrates, church and family are the perfect prescription for many social ills. Children thrive, the family bond strengthens, school success skyrockets, and the nation reaps the reward. As Dr. Fagan says, the intact married families who worship weekly are the greatest generator of human goods in the land. We encourage policy makers to strongly consider whether their proposals support such a family structure. It is to society’s advantage that they do.”
How constitutional is it for a single federal judge to throw out over 700,000 votes? Moreover, this legislation went through a litmus test of it constitutionality before it was even allowed to be brought up for a vote.
Bottom line is that obviously this judge did not like the law, and looked for some B.S. reason to through it out. Yeah this rat bum judge needs to be removed from his position.
I went to church tonight and the sermon was from Matthew 13:1-23. Verses 13 through 15 are soooo applicable.
I can't wait for Demoscum to be voted out of office. Then, maybe there will be a chance to expel this anus-lover.
The defense. Notice I said politely. They did not ask for whatever legal order they would have needed. I suspect they didn’t figure it would work and it would have made the judge more prejudiced against them.
Interesting. Do you have a link? I thought the bit about his orientation didn’t come out publicly until the trial was well underway.
He will lift the stay.
Legislatures, direct votes by the people, and the rule of law mean NOTHING in America today.
We are currently ruled by individuals in black robes and a federal bureaucracy. They are the the new Masters of Society.
No, the facts about his “orientation” came out before the trial, and it made the homo-Nazi’s mouths water.