
CONTACTStaffCAREER OPPORTUNITIESADVERTISE WITH USPRIVACY POLICYPRIVACY PREFERENCESTERMS OF USELEGAL NOTICE
© 2023 Pride Publishing Inc.
All Rights reserved
All Rights reserved
Scroll To Top
By continuing to use our site, you agree to our Private Policy and Terms of Use.
Proposition 8 proponents' recent argument that U.S. district judge Vaughn Walker's decision in the case should be thrown out on the grounds that he is gay is a "bogus" maneuver, according to a Tuesday editorial in TheNew York Times.
"It is well established that personal characteristics, like race, sex, ethnicity, religion or sexual orientation, do not by themselves invoke the rule that judges must step aside if their 'impartiality might reasonably be questioned,'" the editorial reads.
"Indeed, following the open-ended logic of Proposition 8's lawyers, it is hard to think who, if anyone, is qualified to rule on this case," the editorial continues. "Certainly not wedded heterosexual judges whose marriages stand to be somehow diminished, according to the antimarriage crowd, if Judge Walker's ruling survives appeal in federal circuit court."
Read the full editorial here.
Erwin Chemerinsky, founding dean of the University of California, Irvine, School of Law, wrote a recent op-ed for The Advocate on the matter, which can be found here.
From our Sponsors
Most Popular
Watch Now: Advocate Channel
Trending Stories & News
For more news and videos on advocatechannel.com, click here.
Trending Stories & News
For more news and videos on advocatechannel.com, click here.
Latest Stories
Advocate Channel
HealthAdvocate Channel
WomenMuslim Women Athletes Condemn Hijab Bans, Fight For Inclusive Clothing in Sports
January 17 2023 11:45 AM
Advocate Channel
PoliceAdvocate Channel
Women