“One advantage (to taking it back to the 9th Circuit) is simply to say to the Supreme Court when they go for review, we went to the 9th Circuit and we asked them to hear it en banc,” said Little. “And if the 9th Circuit declines, they can say we asked them and gave them a chance.”
Prop 8 Reax w/ Hastings Law Professor Rory Little:
Backers Of Proposition 8 Want SF Appeals Court To Review CaseLittle said that if the court were to grant a hearing en banc, backers of Proposition 8 might also get a dissent which they consider stronger and could write out their view better for the Supreme Court justices.
Please see complete story @:
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2012/02/21/backers-of-california-same-sex-ma…
Democratic appointees outnumber Republican appointees on the 9th Circuit, UC Irvine Law School Dean Erwin Chemerinsky observed. “I have no doubt that there is a core group of conservatives that will want to go” for reconsideration, he said. “But I can’t imagine they will have the votes.”
UC Davis constitutional law professor Vikram Amar said it made sense that ProtectMarriage would want 9th Circuit review to get “two bites of the apple.”
Please see complete story @:
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-prop8-20120209,0,7795042.story
The social divide over same-sex marriage rights was apparent even in the opinion issued Tuesday by a three-judge panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals declaring Proposition 8 to be unconstitutional in California.
Judge N. Randy Smith, who was appointed to the 9th Circuit by President George W. Bush, dissented from the primary holding of Judges Stephen Reinhardt and Michael Daly Hawkins, both named to the court by Democratic presidents, that there was no legitimate governmental interest in depriving gays and lesbians of the right to marry.
A skeptical Ninth Circuit refused to invalidate U.S. District Court Judge Vaughn Walker’s ruling on the grounds that he is gay who could potentially benefit from his own ruling.
The three federal appellate judges (N. Randy Smith, Michael Hawkins, and Stephen Reinhard) rejected a claim by Charles Cooper, an attorney for Prop. 8 sponsors ProtectMarriage.com, who stated Walker’s failure to disclose whether he is gay deprived the trial parties of information they could have used to challenge Walker’s impartiality. Addressing this issue, the panel wrote: Finally, we address Proponents’ motion to vacate the district court’s judgment. On April 6, 2011, after resigning from the bench, former Chief Judge Walker disclosed he was gay and that he had for the past ten years been in a relationship with another man. Proponents moved shortly thereafter to vacate the judgment on the basis that 28 U.S.C. Sec. 455(b)(4) obligated Chief Judge Walker to recuse himself, because he had an “interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding,” and that 28 U.S.C. Sec. 455(a) obligated him either to recuse himself or to disclose his potential conflict, because his “impartiality might reasonably be questioned.” . . . The district court properly held that . . . Chief Judge Walker had no obligation to recuse himself . . . As Chief Judge Ware explained, the fact that a judge “could be affected by the outcome of a proceeding, in the same way that other members of the general public would be affected, is not a basis for either recusal or disqualification . . . “ Nor could it possibly be “reasonable to presume,” . . . “that a judge is incapable of making an impartial decision about the constitutionality of a law, solely because, as a citizen, the judge could be affected by the proceeding.” . . . To hold otherwise would demonstrate a lack of respect for the integrity of our federal courts.”Please see story @:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2012/02/gay-marriage-prop-8s-ban-ruled-…
SAN FRANCISCO (RNN) – The cultural war over the definition of marriage is set to reach another milestone Tuesday, as a federal court of appeals files an opinion on the constitutionality of California’s Proposition 8, a voter initiative which in 2008 defined marriage as a union between a man and a woman.
A three-judge panel on the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals will deliver the ruling, which is expected at 10 a.m. PT. The group is composed of Judge Stephen Reinhardt, a Carter appointee; Judge Michael Daly Hawkins, a Clinton appointee; and Judge N. Randy Smith, a George W. Bush appointee.
Please continue @:
http://www.14news.com/story/16695307/court-to-rule-on-controversial-same-sex-…
Note: This database was updated 2/4/2009 with new records. These include itemized contributions donated between 10/19/2008 and 12/31/2008 as reported to the California Secretary of State.
Search the database below to see who has contributed money to the campaigns supporting and opposing California’s Proposition 8, which would ban same-sex marriage.
To perform a narrow search, enter a person’s name below and click the “Search” button. For a broader search, select from one or more of the drop-down menus to see a list of contributors by state, city and ZIP code.
(Source: Richard Dalton, a computer-assisted reporting specialist, compiled this analysis of Prop. 8 campaign contributions for the Associated Press. The analysis is based on campaign finance reports submitted to the Calif. Secretary of State’s Office since 2007 and contains data current as of Dec 31, 2008.)
Click on “Details” to see more about contributors, including employer and occupation.
|
No records found
|
On that critical question, several justices noted that the California Supreme Court always has, as a matter of practice if not written policy, allowed the sponsors of ballot questions to appear before it when their measures were challenged.
“Never in any recorded (case) have proponents been denied the right to advance their interests,” Associate Justice Kathryn Werdegar noted during the closely watched arguments. “The present state of California law is we allow liberal intervention.”
Read more: http://www.wsvn.com/news/articles/national/21005305452979/##ixzz1XExBfeXW
* Materials for this article were obtained from Wikipedia, the Encyclopedia of GLBTQ, Michael Nava for Judge, La Bloga, and a blog titled “Ninglun Floating Life”.
“Michael Angel Nava, born September 16, 1954 in <u>Stockton</u>, California, is an attorney and writer. He is a third-generation Californian of Mexican descent. He was born and raised in <u>Sacramento</u>.” http://tinyurl.com/michaelnava “Michael Nava is the second of six children in what he calls a “tragically unhappy” Chicano family. He was the son of a man with whom his mother, then married, had had an affair, and though he was given his stepfather’s last name, he knew from an early age that his mother was not married to his father, who in effect abandoned him. Molested by a family member at age eleven and realizing his gayness at age twelve, Nava knew that he had to escape his mother’s religiosity and his stepfather’s physical abuse.” (From “Ninglun Floating Life”) “Nava grew up in a predominantly working-class Mexican neighborhood in Sacramento, California called Gardenland. In an essay of the same title, he wrote about his neighborhood: “The best way to think of Gardenland is not as an American suburb at all, but rather as a Mexican village, transported perhaps from Guanajuato, where my grandmother’s family originated, and set down lock, stock and chicken coop in the middle of California. Nava, a precocious child, was constantly reading.” (From Wikipedia) <img src=”http://idisk.mac.com/mstrickla/Public/01101009.jpg” alt=”" width=”400″ height=”300″ />* Materials for this article were obtained from Wikipedia, the Encyclopedia of GLBTQ, Michael Nava for Judge, La Bloga, and a blog titled “Ninglun Floating Life”.
“Michael Angel Nava, born September 16, 1954 in Stockton, California, is an attorney and writer. He is a third-generation Californian of Mexican descent. He was born and raised in
Sacramento.” http://tinyurl.com/michaelnava
“Michael Nava is the second of six children in what he calls a “tragically unhappy” Chicano family. He was the son of a man with whom his mother, then married, had had an affair, and though he was given his stepfather’s last name, he knew from an early age that his mother was not married to his father, who in effect abandoned him. Molested by a family member at age eleven and realizing his gayness at age twelve, Nava knew that he had to escape his mother’s religiosity and his stepfather’s physical abuse.” (From “Ninglun Floating Life”)
“Nava grew up in a predominantly working-class Mexican neighborhood in Sacramento, California called Gardenland. In an essay of the same title, he wrote about his neighborhood: “The best way to think of Gardenland is not as an American suburb at all, but rather as a Mexican village, transported perhaps from Guanajuato, where my grandmother’s family originated, and set down lock, stock and chicken coop in the middle of California. Nava, a precocious child, was constantly reading.” (From Wikipedia)

Mr. Michael Nava, began writing what would become his first novel – “The Little Death” (La petite mort– A French metaphor for orgasm) while studying for the bar exam. The novel “Goldenboy” followed soon thereafter. Nava’s novels feature Henry Rios — a gay Latino criminal defense lawyer who practices in Los Angeles. According to Nava: “Judicial attorneys and law clerks can have a huge influence in shaping the direction of the law, but there are very few attorneys of color in those positions because they are mostly filled through the Old Boys Network. We need to establish our own
network.”(Photo:courtesy)
“Nava began his legal career as a trial lawyer in the City Attorney’s Office where he prosecuted criminal cases and did approximately 50 jury trials. He was an associate at the appellate boutique firm of Horvitz & Levy before becoming a judicial staff attorney; since 2004 he has been a judicial attorney for Justice Carlos R. Moreno.” (From Wikipedia)

Justice Carlos Moreno, is due to leave the court by March of 2011. According to the San Jose Mercury News, Moreno would urge Governor Brown to replace him with a Latino: “If he asks for my opinion, I think he should do whatever he can that a Latino replaces me on the
court”.(Photo:Courtesy)
In addition, Nava is an advocate for diversity in the legal profession and the judiciary. From 2007 to 2009, he was a member of State Bar of California’s Council on Access and Fairness, who advises the State Bar’s Board of Governor on matters relating to diversity in the legal profession. He put forth the case for judicial diversity in a 2009 law review article, “A Servant of All: Humility, Humanity and Judicial Diversity”, published by the Golden Gate University Law Review.
Michael Nava recently ran for a judicial position in San Francisco. The following was stated on Nava for judge’s web site:
“Michael is also involved in the community as an active parishioner at Most Holy Redeemer and was a member of the board of directors of the GLBT Historical Society. In October 2008, just before Proposition 8 banned same-sex marriage, Justice Moreno married Michael and his partner, George Herzog.”
According to the Legal Pad, a blog published by the Recorder, Nava’s husband, George Herzog, loaned the campaign $50,000.
http://legalpad.typepad.com/my_weblog/2010/10/ulmers-got-the-cash-navas-got-the-chinese-surname.html
On “La Bloga” ( http://tinyurl.com/labloga1 ),the following was posted: “Michael Nava isn’t qualified to be a judge. In my view, he also lacks integrity. Like Nava, I am also a judicial staff attorney, openly gay, and a Democrat. Consider this: On the Chinese language ballot, he translated his name as “Fairness and Justice Lee,” a blatant attempt to misrepresent his identity. If you are okay with that, vote for Nava. Nothing I could say could convince you otherwise. Maybe I’m being paranoid: what do you think? Do you think this Chinese name come from a place of truth or clever marketing.?”