The anti-Prop. 8 mob strikes again
Judicial activism + far Left radical activism = Courtroom intimidation.
Yesterday, liberal California Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker issued an unprecedented ruling that will put the trial involving a challenge to the Prop. 8 same-sex marriage ban on YouTube.
SFGate.com reports:
Next week’s trial in San Francisco of a lawsuit challenging the initiative that banned same-sex marriage in California won’t be televised live, but it will be videotaped for delayed Internet release on YouTube, a federal judge ruled Wednesday.
Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker in San Francisco ordered the video coverage, the first for a federal trial in California, over the objections of Proposition 8′s sponsors. Their lawyer argued that allowing the proceedings to be viewed outside the courthouse would violate their right to a fair trial by intimidating their witnesses.
“The knowledge that you’re testifying to untold thousands or millions … can cause some witnesses to become more timid” and induce others to be overly dramatic, attorney Michael Kirk told Walker.
Prop. 8′s campaign committee, Protect Marriage, has maintained that some of its supporters have been harassed, and that witnesses whose testimony was widely seen would face further danger. Walker will have the power to order that individual witnesses’ faces be concealed or their voices muted on the YouTube uploads. Kirk said such actions would only draw attention to the witnesses. But Walker said this case seemed ideal for a pilot program, approved last month by the federal appeals court in San Francisco, to allow telecasting of selected nonjury civil trials. He cited the wide interest in the case and said most of the witnesses will be campaign officials or academic experts accustomed to speaking in public.
“I’ve always thought that if the public could see how the judicial process works, they would take a somewhat different view of it,” the judge said.
I generally support more sunshine in all government proceedings. But the judge’s unusual method of securing video coverage is extremely troubling. This isn’t a sincere educational effort to provide transparency to the public. It’s a flagrant attempt at making Prop. 8 a show trial — and intimidating Prop. 8 backers who will be called to testify.
Ed Whelan at Bench Memos lays out Walker’s agenda thoroughly. Start here, then go here, and here. Writes Whelan: “Walker is rushing to override longstanding prohibitions on televised coverage of federal trials so that he can authorize televised coverage of the Proposition 8 trial. Televised coverage would generate much greater publicity for ringmaster Walker’s circus. And, whether Walker desires the effect or is somehow blind to it, televised coverage would surely also heighten the prospect that witnesses and attorneys supporting Proposition 8 would face harassment, intimidation, and abuse. In his eagerness to stack the deck against Proposition 8 and its defenders, Walker has resorted to procedural shenanigans and outright illegality.”
Former federal district judge Paul Cassell weighs in: “Without getting into the merits of Proposition 8 or the legal challenges to it, I agree with Whelan that it seems highly unusual for a judge to authorize televised proceedings for this particular case as part of some new “pilot” project to see how televised proceedings work. Surely if there were going to be a test run of a new idea, it should be in a more run-of-the-mill case rather than this particular highly controversial one. Moreover, it does appear that public comment process has been completely short-circuited.”
Indeed, the public comment process seems to have been wholly fixed in favor of anti-Prop. 8, nutroots-fueled feedback.
The MoveOn-backed left-wing group “Courage Campaign” conveniently coordinated an e-mail campaign backing Walker’s solicitation of public comment on his YouTube order. I’m on the group’s e-mail list and received this on Jan. 5:
Dear Michelle –
This is extremely urgent and extremely important.
U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker — who will be overseeing a federal court challenge to Prop 8 starting this Monday (January 11) — is considering whether or not to open the court room to TV cameras.
The court just announced that it is seeking public comment on the proposal to televise the trial — and that all comments must be submitted to the court by a Friday deadline.
The interest in this case is unprecedented. And not surprisingly, supporters of Prop 8 — who eliminated the right of same-sex couples to marry — do NOT want the trial to be televised.
Opponents of Prop 8 — led by attorneys David Boies and Ted Olson — are seeking to televise the case in the interests of full transparency. They want this historic trial to be watched by as many Americans as possible. And, of course, we agree.
We have just this one chance to make our voices heard — thousands of Americans calling for equality, transparency and accountability. That’s why we’re teaming up with CREDO Action to collect as many signatures as possible asking Judge Walker to televise the case. We need your signature now:
SIGNATURE DEADLINE: FRIDAY 9 a.m.:
http://www.couragecampaign.org/TeleviseTheTrial
Together, along with our friends at CREDO, we will hand-deliver your signatures to Judge Vaughn Walker on Friday before the deadline.
This case presents issues that are very important to the public, and will affect millions of people. However, if the case is not televised, only a tiny fraction will ever be able to watch the trial in person.
By televising the trial, the public will be able to see for themselves the arguments and evidence presented by both sides, and will therefore have more confidence in the outcome of the trial.
That’s why we think the Prop 8 court case should be televised and we’re collecting as many signatures as possible to submit to Judge Vaughn Walker. Click here to sign now and say “YES — the Prop 8 trial should be televised.” SIGNATURE DEADLINE: FRIDAY 9 a.m.:
http://www.couragecampaign.org/TeleviseTheTrial
If you know other people who believe the Prop 8 trial should be televised as well, please forward this message to them ASAP.
Thank you so much for making your voice heard at this critical time. We will update you as soon as further news develops.
Rick Jacobs
Chair, Courage Campaign Institute
Yesterday, the group followed up:
BREAKING: Judge Walker rules; 82,103 say “televise Prop 8 trial!”
Yesterday, we asked you to respond to Judge Vaughn Walker’s request for public comment on potentially televising the Prop 8 federal trial that starts Monday. In less than 24 hours, an amazing 82,103 people have signed the letter from the Courage Campaign Institute and CREDO Action.
Despite Judge Vaughn Walker’s ruling below (please read on), we still need you to sign the letter. With right-wing groups like the National Organization for Marriage and Focus on the Family gathering signatures to stop any broadcast of the Prop 8 trial, we need to spread the word ASAP.
GOAL: 100,000 signatures. DEADLINE: Friday 9 AM:
http://www.couragecampaign.org/TeleviseTheTrial
Dear Michelle –
The news is spreading like wildfire. And it’s both good and bad.
From a San Jose Mercury News article:
“Chief U.S. District Judge Vaughn Walker approved court-operated cameras in his courtroom for delayed release on YouTube, but rejected a bid by media organizations to televise the proceedings themselves for live broadcast.”
This decision is NOT final: Judge Walker is leaving the public comment period open until Friday, pending a ruling on his decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th Circuit.
While we are pleased that the trial may be on a delayed broadcast via YouTube at least, our call for full transparency — a televised broadcast that network news and cable channels can pick up live, as it happens — has not been met.
And, it’s entirely possible that the 9th Circuit Appeals Court may overrule Judge Walker’s ruling, shutting down all broadcasting — even a delayed daily YouTube broadcast. Lawyers representing supporters of Prop. 8 have already opposed broadcasting the trial in any form whatsoever and are likely to fight Walker’s ruling.
Millions of lives across America will be affected by this federal trial challenging Prop 8. That’s why more than 80,000 people have already signed our letter asking for a televised trial. To keep up the pressure before the public comment period closes on Friday, please sign here now:
GOAL: 100,000 signatures. DEADLINE: Friday 9 AM:
http://www.couragecampaign.org/TeleviseTheTrial
With right-wing religious groups like NOM and Focus on the Family organizing against televising the trial, we need as many signatures on this letter as possible.
If you know other people who believe the Prop 8 trial should be televised so that as many people as possible can see it, please forward this message to them ASAP.
Thank you so much for your incredible response to this critical action. We will update you again as soon as news breaks.
Rick Jacobs
Chair, Courage Campaign Institute
The anti-Prop. 8 mob has its thumbs on the scales of justice. Brace for a courtroom circus.
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
 |
Bigoted anti-bigots: How the gay-marriage mob slimed Manny Pacquiao
May 18, 2012 08:15 AM by Michelle Malkin
116 CommentsDocument drop: Lib 9th circuit panel rules Proposition 8 unconstitutional
February 7, 2012 01:09 PM by Michelle Malkin
152 CommentsStop the hate campaign against law-abiding American businesses
February 2, 2011 04:03 AM by Michelle Malkin
244 CommentsCalif. judge overturns voter-approved Prop. 8 gay marriage ban
August 4, 2010 04:51 PM by Michelle Malkin
955 Comments
Dear Cindy & Meghan: Let’s talk about who’s really being silenced over Prop. 8
January 25, 2010 11:36 AM by Michelle Malkin
126 Comments
Supreme Court blocks Prop. 8 show trial plan
January 11, 2010 11:31 AM by Michelle Malkin
34 Comments
Climate of hate: More threats from the gay marriage mob
November 10, 2009 05:24 PM by Michelle Malkin
49 Comments
Left-wing thug of the day
November 5, 2009 01:18 PM by Michelle Malkin
78 Comments
Categories: Proposition 8
Nice Deb
» The Organized Left Now Stalking RomneyNice Deb
» Uncovered Ad Shows Obama Appeared At 1996 Event Hosted By Democratic Socialists of AmericaNice Deb
» Uncovered Ad Shows Obama Appeared At 1996 Event Hosted By Democratic Socialists of AmericaNewsBusters.org
» Reuters's Freeland: 'Anorexic' Americans Think Tax Bite Too Heavy When In Fact It's Dangerously Thin
I think Ito and the OJs showed us how this works.
Maybe next they can provide a Google Map to Witness homes…
This will be the first trial with a fashion commentator.
Michelle, I recognize Boies as one of Gore’s attroneys during his challenge to the 2000 election results.
I am not surprised by Boies’s involvement in this.
But, wasn’t Ted Olson G.W. Bush’s solicitor general?
Didn’t Olson’s wife Barbara die on 9/11 as her plane hit the Pentagon?
Is Olson himself a RINO?
Sure gives the appearance of being meretricious, like so, so many lawyers….
…attorneys….
Apologies.
Mmmmm, the motives to televise this particular trial are suspect.
Though if one trial is to be broadcast, then all trials should be broadcast.
I’d like to see the parking lot ‘takings’ case in Seatac, Washington. It is all 9th District, so why not?
Moreover, I have concerns about editing with having it on You Tube. A better place might be Court TV (does it still exist?)
Like it or not, the information about the individuals and their concerns about unwanted publicity would still be available, with or without broadcasting it.
call me crazy – but I think in the long run this could be a good thing for us. We cannot run in fear of intimidation, we need to face these people head on and what better way to shine the light than with cameras. Maybe I’m being simplistic, but I guess we will see. Evil will be shown up front and personal. This will be just one more thing…
Errah, Calling Judge Ito, calling Judge Ito! Does the court have the requisite 3 rings and elephants??!!
Could be worse. It could be a street fair.
Keep an eye out, Michelle – NJ is going to vote on its own gay-marriage act. Apparently the vote is scheduled for this afternoon in Trenton, so please pray that these state senators are wise and strong enough to rebuff the anti-traditionalists. We need only to hold them off today – it’s the last day of the previous administration and Monday marks the first day of the new state senate term. If they don’t get it today, they won’t get it at all because Christie’s vowed to veto it. Corzine, on the other hand, is more than willing to sign it.
PRAY. PRAY WITHOUT CEASING. PRAY NOW.
Wow! I wonder if Barbara Olson would have agreed with Ted Olson on this one?
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/opinion/blogs/beltway-confidential/Ted-Olson-goes-to–46137917.html
All that has to be done to make the American public aware of exactly what they are voting for is to do ads with the video of the Gay Pride Day in San Francisco. The images are absolutely shocking …. and some like the following have the Episcopal Bishop of the diocese there riding in it.
http://www.standfirminfaith.com/index.php/site/article/6915/
My only wish is that I am allowed to testify at a leftist show trial and then my home located. I would love the see the look on the leftards faces when they arrive at my home facing the business end of a M-14.
Oh boy, a spectacle on all sides.
Agreed, missCheryl. The libs have uppped the ante, we must be willing to do the same.
What the anti-prop 8 people did by trying to intimidate donors to Prop 8 was unconscionable, and a violation of why we have the concept of the secret ballot, and not an open one. If you don’t fight fire with fire, the libs will walk allover you. Now that the libs have said that when it comes to deciding “Gay Marriage”-in itself an oxymoron- that you as a witness have no expectation to privacy (and by definition, safety) if you are a witness
, then you must fight back.
If anything this decision by Walker may well wake Californians to realize that liberal attempts to destroy their gun rights are in fact part and parcel of a liberal attempt to destroy your freeedoms (and by connotation your reputation, and even your life) if you oppose them. The libs are hanging themselves by doing this.
That is what it is going to take to stop a liberal justice mob once they are unleashed by some liberal fools “in authority”. Does anyone remember the Rodney King riots of 1992, and how the black mayor of LA, Thom Bradley made comments that fueled that riot, and that he was never called on the carpet for such irresponsibility?
He should have been sued.
Sounds like they’re getting ready to orchestrate the tyranny of the mob.
Where’s Judge Ito?
these commies really don’t believe in democracy. the people vote the “wrong” way, and we go find a black robed god to declare it unconstitutional. since they define the constitution, who checks the checkers?
We can expect this. If we are going to defeat this we need people of courage and integrity to look the mob straight in the eye and then spit.
So they’re not going to publish a transcript of the trial? How did we manage the previous 200 plus years of jurisprudence in this country without You Tube?
Will Barack Obama’s “safe schools czar” Kevin Jennings offer expert testimony in educating children in Fisting? Maybe “safe” Fisting kits should be distributed to the first 1,000 youtube viewers under 12?
Basically, what’s going to happen is what we’ll all have to vote on this again.
I got this off of AmIRight, a site for parody song lyrics. It’s sung to the tune of an old Beatles song called “Another Girl.” This one is called “Another Vote.”
It hits the nail right on the head.
Wait. Wasn’t that an amendment to the State Constitution, duly enacted after a majority of voters approved it? What are they challenging? What CAN they challenge?
Hey anti-prop 8 folks – you lost. Get over it.
This is from a liberal judiciary that believes they can amend the constitution through judicial review. They can’t, of course. But that never stopped liberals.
Instead of fighting over T.V. viewing, the attorney for Prop 8 should be arguing jurisdiction. No court has the jurisdiction to overturn a section of the constitution. If they did, then they could overturn the section that limits their own power. DUH! That’s why this trial should not even be taking place!
I don’t know that it would be terrible to show this trial. The gay crowd are a bunch of pervs anyway; let them be seen for the deviants they are, show them doing their perv thing outside the courthouse and shrieking at the righteous and maybe the fence sitters will finally turn against them.
Just in: New Jersey Senate Defeats Gay Marriage Bill
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2010/01/07/new-jersey-gay-marriage/
oh yeah!
This isn’t good enough. Nothing satisfies rabid activists except total capitulation by their “enemy.”
So what is that now? About 40 out of 50 (or is that 58) states have put thumbs down on gay marriage? When will these morons get a clue?
TooMuchTime, the agenda of many (not all) homosexuals is for society to accept it as a “norm.” Marriage would go a long way (in their view) to do this.
I’m with MissCheryl on this one. You should have courage in your commitments. Don’t shy away from your values and maybe others will stand behind you. Of course, if you get the government, at all levels, out of the marriage business altogether we would not need these stupid law suits. “Marriage” should remain a religious institution; Civil unions can be whatever a state decides. Less government is always best.
I meant courage in your convictions. My stupid fingers can’t keep up with my brain.
Look for Jerry Brown, the current Ca Atty General, to attempt to use this as a vehicle to parade his face in his quest for the governors office.
Brown, as Atty General, tried to sabotage the voting by attempting to mislead the voters by calling this a gay rights issue in his description of Proposition 8. This proposition actually contains NO rights.
Atty General Brown has decided to abandon the people of Ca in order to showboat his face in this trial as being against the prop 8.
This is exactly the kind of corrupt politician that sickens the entire political process and is destroying the fabric of California and the US.
There is no question that this liberal judge will rule that the people of Ca have absolutely no right to determine what the definition of a word actually is. This judge has already made several decisions that are grounds for appeal. Particularly in his determination of who is even going to be allowed to testify. Also expect this entire show trial to be appealed to the US Supreme court where it will be set aside.
Throughout this process, the radical parts of the gay community will show the full force of their hatred of the rest of this country.
Everything you wanted to know about Ted Olson’s fight for gay marriage, but were afraid to ask
***
Could Judge Lance Ito and the cast of the O.J. Simpson Trial fame handle the courtroom? It worked out so well then.
***
John Bibb
***
To those who have never had the misfortune of actually litigating a case in Judge Walker’s courtroom, there are some things you should know about him. He is a preening and vainglorious man and judge. When Vaughn Walker went on the federal bench, his already selfabsorbed personality got even worse. He is a star struck judge and he yearns for the acceptance of David Boies and to a lesser extent, Ted Olsen. Walker craves the acceptance of David Boies. And to top it off, this is Vaughn Walker’s moment in the sun. Instead of dry as dust cases about land use control matters or water rights, Walker is now at the vortex. He can be a hero to the law school professors who will lionize him and bring him to their campuses. Walker is very similar to another pompous judge: Not Lance Ito but Richard Goldstone. Writing a liberal/leftist decision will be Walker’s ticket to immortality. His 15 minutes of fame are here.
let the people of hew jersey have a constitutional change vote on the issue of homosexual marriage or civil unions. bet it would fail as it has every other place the elite ruling class of the court or the congress have been forced to put it on a ballot. IF IT CAN’T PASS IN CALIFORNIA IN 2008, IT CAN’T PASS ANYWHERE.
As if there were any doubt about certain elements of the gay agenda. (2004)
Form the link:
What happened to people who voted for Prop 8 will certainly happen to anyone testifying on behalf of Prop 8. Unfortunately I believe that even if cameras were not allowed, the gay side would obtain names (easily done during a trial and afterward) and proceed to terrorize them.
Let me get this straight (no pun intended), the gay groups are going to put sponsors of prop 8 on trial. Ummm, the sponsors such as Protect Marriage had very little impact on the voters. If they drag in the preachers from black and hispanic churches to testify, then there may be something to it. I bet BHO’s Reverend Wright would thumb his nose at any idea of same sex people laying together.
The truth is the majority of whites in California voted down prop 8, but whites are the collective minority in California. The gay groups are going after whites because they know they will get a beat down by the blacks and hispanics if they harassed them and the media may not necessarily side with the gays.
Two years ago two gay guys were mugged in a park where the gay pride celebration was going on by two black men. They were beaten with baseball bats and had their wallets stolen. The media here refused to back up claims of a hate crime.
Until I see a march on Compton, South Central LA and places like Barrio Logan there is no way I will support this insanity. Besides, their only real goal is to be able to litigate everyone to death. I not only hope the gay groups fail, I hope this backfires on them miserably.
I really figured Omu would weigh in on this thread.