And what a brief it is! The brief goes to great length to insult and denigrate 'The District Court' (aka Judge Vaughn Walker). Here's the first of its notable takedowns.
THE DISTRICT COURT'S KEY "FACT" FINDINGS ARE DUE NO DEFERENCE AND IN ANY EVENT ARE UNRELIABLE AND ULTIMATELY IRRELEVANT.
More after the cut.
Nowhere in its 136-page opinion does the district court even cite any of the evidence overwhelmingly acknowledging responsible procreation and child-rearing as the animating purpose of marriage... And the district court ignored it quite willfully; in the court's view, apparently only oral testimony presented at trial constituted 'evidence' on the issue (and its treatment of even this evidence was egregiously selective and one-sided...)
The district court simply could not have violated these well-established legal
principles more pervasively.
Well, that seems clear enough. Judge Vaughn Walker, appointed in 1989 by President George H. W. Bush to the Federal District Court, a federal judge of 21 years, has no f***ing clue. In fact, he does things for no good reason:
The district court held that marriage has been universally defined and practiced as an opposite-sex institution by virtually every society in recorded history for no good reason.
Aside from the good reasons he gave in his decision, of course. And while we're at it, Judge Walker thinks most Americans are anti-gay bigots:
the district court judge found that over seven million Californians, lacking any conceivable rational basis for supporting Proposition 8, were motivated solely by animosity and condescension toward gays and lesbians... ((The District Court)) defames as anti-gay bigots not only seven million California voters, but everyone else in this Country, and elsewhere, who believes that the traditional opposite-sex definition of marriage continues to meaningfully serve society's interests -- from the current President of the United States, to a large majority of legislators throughout the Nation, both in statehouses and in the United States Congress, and even to most of the scores of state and federal judges who have addressed the issue.
Just so we're perfectly clear, the judge doesn't understand to how to conduct a trial either.
the district court dedicates nearly 100 pages of its ruling to recounting the trial proceedings, identifying the evidence it considered, and setting forth 80 separate findings of fact, as though the legal issues in the case turned on adjudicative facts rather than legislative facts...
In short, the question before the court is not whether the legislative facts underlying the explanation for the legislation are true or false; it is whether they are "at least debatable."
So, like, he shouldn't have heard evidence? The trial was meaningless?
I don't know enough about law to know whether the defendant-intervenors have a point here. But it certainly seems like they are trying to get the Appellate Court to completely ignore the proceedings of the trial; something I can't imagine that said Court would be willing to do just because the Defendant-Intervenors say so. On the other hand, they have to argue that way, because they spent their trial time not presenting evidence, not calling witnesses, and not making any plausible argument as to why they should prevail.
And then, of course, it was all Judge Walker's fault that the Defense witnesses couldn't testify:
The trial proceedings were skewed from the outset, given that four of Pro-
ponents' expert witnesses refused to testify so long as the proceedings were being videotaped. The district court asserts that "the record does not reveal the reason behind proponents' failure to call their expert witnesses" because "the timeline shows "that proponents failed to make any effort to call their witnesses after the potential for public broadcast in the case had been eliminated." But the district court, even after it withdrew the case from consideration for broadcasting, nevertheless insisted on videotaping the proceedings. As Proponents' counsel explained at trial, the withdrawn experts "did not want to appear with any recording of any sort, whatsoever."
To summarize the Defendant-Intervenors' positions:
- Everything Judge Walker did was wrong.
- Evidence presented at trial is irrelevant.
- Our witnesses were too scared to testify, because they might be recorded saying what they believe, so the fact that we didn't have any witnesses is irrelevant.
- We don't need no stinkin' arguments, because logic is for wusses. Rational basis says we can make up any shit we want, whenever we want, even after the trial is over, and make you listen to it.
The plaintiffs will get to rebut this opening brief, then the defense will get to rebut the rebuttal. And then, about three months from now on December 16th, oral arguments will be heard. That day can't come soon enough.
=====================================================================
If you're interested in a review of six other important cases involving LGBT equality before the courts check this out.
If you'd like to do something RIGHT NOW to further the cause of equality in this country, you probably already know that in two days the Senate will be voting on Don't Ask, Don't Tell and the Dream Act. Congress may also soon take up the Uniting American Families Act. So:
- You can contact Harry Reid, telling you support UAFA, the repeal of DADT and passage of the Dream Act
- You can contact your Senators, telling them the same thing.
- You can call the White House, and let President Obama know that you expect nothing less than for him to keep his promises on these matters as well.
Harry Reid's Washington office: 202-224-3542
Harry Reid's email: form
White House Comment Line: 202-456-1111
Email the White House: form
Contact information for all Senators: US Senate
Thanks for the Action Diary here jpm! The movement, or lack there of, on our issues will be fast and furious in the next few months. Thanks for keeping us updated here.
ReplyDelete