Black judges should not be allowed to hear discrimination cases

That’s essentially what the assholes representing, umm, someone (not sure who) argued when trying to appeal the decision invalidating Prop. 8 in California.  (source)  

<blockquote>Lawyers for a coalition of religious conservative groups met a skeptical audience in the three-judge panel from the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals as they argued that now-retired Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker should have revealed that he had a long-term male partner. (source)  </blockquote>

The argument is essentially that Walker stood to benefit from Prop. 8 being overturned, therefore he should have been disqualified from the case.  
 
So you female judges out there, just step on down from any case involving sex discrimination.  No black judges on affirmative action cases.  And so on… 
 
 

5 Responses to Black judges should not be allowed to hear discrimination cases

  1. blueollie says:

    Let’s not be too hasty here; the logical extension is that fundamentalist Christian judges shouldn’t be allowed to hear such cases either. :)

  2. canvasback says:

    I see gender, race and national origin listed in the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Nothing about homosexuals. From a federal standpoint your analogies fail to convince.
    Put yourself in Judge Walker’s position, he may have been dreaming about this moment since he was 13. After all this appeal process I suppose he’ll get his way in the end. But if we’re going to invalidate part of the California state constitution and reverse the California Supreme Court we should make a good faith effort to avoid the appearance of bias.

    • Walt K says:

      Unbelievable. And good little heteros have been waiting since they were 13 for their chance to stamp down these uppity gays. Who gets to decide the case?

    • RobP says:

      This argument is incoherent. First, if gay marriage is such a threat to straight marriage, then straights would be strongly interested in and more likely to be biased toward measures that reinforce straight marriage. So presumably straights cannot reliably rule impartially on Proposition 8. And as you noted, sexual orientation is not a protected class. So who displays the appropriate lack of apparent bias? Do we need bisexual or asexual judges?

      Second, the appearance of bias or lack thereof does not depend on whether or not you happen to be a member of a protected class under the Civil Rights Act or the U.S. Constitution. African-Americans and women are likely to benefit from more stringent enforcement of the CRA and more likely to rule in favor of such measure.

%d bloggers like this: