Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Law Students Blogs -> Nuts & Boalts
(866) 635-2689 for Personal Injury or (866) 635-9402 for Criminal Defense
Find a Local Lawyer
Divorce (866) 635-6190
Personal Injury (866) 635-2689
Criminal Defense (866) 635-9402
Law Students
: Nuts & BoaltsShould a Gay Judge Recuse Himself In Deciding the Constitutionality of Proposition 8?
As the column indicates, Prop. 8's proponents (smartly) have not objected to Judge Walker on the basis of his orientation. There's been no indication of any bias in this trial, and I don't think that a judge's impartiality can be questioned on the basis of his sexual orientation.
That said, 28 U.S.C. § 455 (b)(5) states that a judge should disqualify himself if anyone within a third degree relationship to him or his spouse "is known by the judge to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding." A decision that gay marriage restrictions violate the U.S. Constitution necessarily would have a substantial effect on the interests of gay people and those close to them. These interests would vary from the fundamental (e.g., the right to marry) to the mundane (e.g., taxation and inheritance rights). In fact, the case would affect whether a judge's same-sex partner falls within the designation of "spouse" under these very recusal rules.
I don't know (or have any interest in) anything about Judge Walker's private life, such as whether he has any minor children. But even if he is single and has no children, the legal rights that would accrue from any future relationship would be directly affected by this case.
Again, I don't think impartiality can be reasonably questioned on the basis of orientation. I'm just wondering if Judge Walker may be deciding a case in which he has an interest. (Of course, since Prop. 8 supporters have argued that gay marriage undermines the traditional institution of marriage, one could argue that all heterosexual judges should recuse themselves, too.)
Full post as published by Nuts & Boalts on February 08, 2010 (boomark / email).
California Supreme Court Proposition 8 Decision
Court Rejects Challenges to Proposition 8, but Finds Marriages Valid
Baltimore Strip Search Class Action
Judge Gives Go-ahead
Canceled Insurance
Judge orders Health Net Inc. to pay $9 million settlement after terminating a policyholder's policy after being diagnosed with breast cancer.
Labor and Delivery
Judge awards mother $6 million medical malpractice settlement after baby was born with brain injuries.

Perry v. Schwarzenegger, Prop 8 Trial RECAP
Perry v. Schwarzenegger, The Proposition 8 Trial: A Primer
Proposition 8 Challenge Goes to Court
Supreme Court: Money Can Force Judge Recusal









