Walker Reversed, Boies and Olson Legal Witch-hunt Stymied

Photo: Judge Walker’s Brand of Justice?

Good News!

The Prop 8 campaign is getting a break. Judge Vaughn Walker’s order that all private emails and campaign communications be turned over to the opposition for scrutiny by the tolerance police is being reversed.  Law.com is reporting that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has stayed Judge Walker’s outrageous order saying that the campaign had made a “strong showing” that it would succeed on the merits of the discovery issue.

Ted Olson and David Boies, lawyers in the federal challenge to Proposition 8 , claim that Prop 8 violates the federal constitution, and want to find evidence that the Prop 8 backers were motivated by anti-gay animus.

They’ll of course find nothing, but that was never the point.  The point is: they shouldn’t even be allowed to look. It is none of their business!

The intent of the judge’s order was to intimidate and harass those who support the campaign today and in future campaigns who dare support the natural family.   That order was in direct conflict with the 8 Campaign’s First Amendment rights.

“Whether you like it or not” boys, that kind of roughshod intimidation doesn’t fly in a real court.

Judge Walker should be ashamed of himself for the petty nature of the order he put out in the first place.  It’s no surprise he’s being reversed, and by Clinton appointees no less!  Walker and his judicial activism had it coming.

No matter personal animus, Justice should always be blind.

—Beetle Blogger



  1. December 10, 2009 at 6:04 am

    […] This post was mentioned on Twitter by beetlebabee, Digital Network Army. Digital Network Army said: RT @beetlebabee: Walker Reversed, Boies and Olson Legal Witch-hunt Stymied: http://wp.me/plwcM-1ct #tcot #catcot […]

  2. Ken said,

    December 10, 2009 at 7:44 am

    It is absurd that any judge would order that a nongovernmental citizens groups, operating with private funding to promote a ballot measure before the citizens, would be ordered to reveal private communications. I do not believe “our” side is entitled to see the private communications of any group pushing for marriage neutering, either, if they aren’t receiving tax money.

    Hopefully, Walker’s decision won’t see the light of day again.

    More of my thoughts on this are in my recent entry on Opine (click my name).

  3. JustSayin' said,

    December 10, 2009 at 5:19 pm

    Good news! Keep it comin’! I hear New Jersey has backed off of the gay marriage push as well. It was pretty cheap to ram it through a lame duck session anyway. I guess playing fair doesn’t matter to these guys.

  4. Ross said,

    December 11, 2009 at 3:33 pm

    JustSayin, guess playing fair doesn’t matter to the people who got Question 1 on the ballot in Maine and Ref-71 in Washington by going door to door LYING to people about what they were petitioning for. This fraud was well documented in the news and on youtube.
    So please don’t pretend your side is “playing fair” anymore than the other. Give me a break and get off your high and mighty pedestal

  5. beetlebabee said,

    December 11, 2009 at 3:54 pm

    To what are you referring Ross?

  6. Ross said,

    December 11, 2009 at 6:39 pm

    I was pointing out that neither side is completely “playing fair”. Shady things have happened on BOTH sides of the issue, so somehow pretending that one side is completely playing clean is totally bogus.

    As for what I am referring to, beetle,feel free to google “ref 71 caught on tape”..or here’s a link. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=47u2m4hH0SQ This is the shadyness that happens on the anti-SSM front.

  7. beetlebabee said,

    December 12, 2009 at 8:18 am

    Ross, does that mean you believe Boies and Olson are not playing “fair”?

  8. Patrick said,

    December 12, 2009 at 2:00 pm

    Ross-have you done your research on the Washington referendum? The way this referendum was worded and brought before voters was completely kludgey. I don’t know how anyone kept yes or no straight on this issue. This was an example of a really messed up democratic process. What I thought was most bizarre was a gay rights guy following a signature gathering around a parking lot.

    So far, you’ve left one ambiguous youtube piece in response to an anti-democratic judge’s ridiculous claim to see private emails.

    The gay marriage vote is losing 31-0. And I don’t think 31 states have voted AGAINST gay marriage because the voters are being duped. The bottom line is most Americans DON’T agree with gay marriage and most Americans DON’T believe gay marriage is a right.

  9. Ross said,

    December 13, 2009 at 10:52 am

    Beetle, do you condone the signature gatherer’s actions?

    Patrick: Most Americans did not approve of interracial marriage at the time of it’s passing. Around 70 percent if I recall..that’s a LOT more than the percent of Americans today who don’t approve of gay marriage.

  10. Chairm said,

    December 13, 2009 at 3:45 pm

    Ross, produce the primary source for your claim about ‘interracial marriage’. I think you’ll discover that it does not say what you say it says.

  11. beetlebabee said,

    December 13, 2009 at 4:29 pm

    Ross, is this the best you can come up with? Judge Walker just got slammed by the Ninth Circuit for violating the first amendment rights of the proposition 8 campaign and side shows are all you can respond with? Judge Walker deserved to be shut down for his blatant abuse of the system in trying to orchestrate this witch hunt. This case is not some side show, it’s huge. This is the case SSMers are pinning their hopes on next year. They’ve lost California, Maine, New York and now New Jersey. The tide has turned against SSM politically, but rather than rethink the propriety of your message which has been soundly defeated in state after state, your side is looking for ways to cut the people out of the process altogether. This case is supposed to be the panacea, the great supreme court case that will end all state skirmishes and impose SSM in all 50 states at once.

    How are they going to do that now that they have to play fair?

  12. Fitz said,

    December 16, 2009 at 11:31 am

    The Video was interesting. The guy was being a little shady in his approach. But as it turns out in the end he was for same-sex marriage!

    So it was more an example of a paid signature gatherer – something employed by either side, doing what he had to do to collect the $$$$ he gets from every signature.

    Rahter than a shady tactic of pro-marriage forces, it is simply a shady lingo of a single pro same sex marriage feeling guy who wants money

  13. Ross said,

    December 16, 2009 at 6:57 pm

    Fitz, do you really believe that guy was pro-SSM? LOL, if so I have an island in Mexico I’d like to sell you.

  14. Chairm said,

    December 16, 2009 at 7:50 pm

    Right on, Fitz.

    Ross, do you condone that signature gatherer’s actions?

  15. Ross said,

    December 16, 2009 at 9:03 pm

    Chairm, I do not condone the signature gatherer’s actions..do you?

    Fritz seems to be saying its ok to lie cheat and steal to make $$$..perhaps youre in the same sad boat as him

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: