04-19-2011, 03:12 PM
- Join Date
- Apr 2005
The National Review hasn't caught him or discovered anything here, it's simply that Judge Walker retired and is talking about cases.
BTW, he represented the US Olympic Committee against the Gay Olympics for trademark, and won against the Gay Olympics which is now known as the Gay Games.
Talk about being a dupe.
04-19-2011, 03:22 PM
- Join Date
- Apr 2005
28 U.S.C. § 455 : US Code - Section 455: Disqualification of justice, judge, or magistrate judge
(a) Any justice, judge, or magistrate judge of the United States
shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his
impartiality might reasonably be questioned.
(b) He shall also disqualify himself in the following
(1) Where he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a
party, or personal knowledge of disputed evidentiary facts
concerning the proceeding;
(2) Where in private practice he served as lawyer in the matter
in controversy, or a lawyer with whom he previously practiced law
served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter,
or the judge or such lawyer has been a material witness
(3) Where he has served in governmental employment and in such
capacity participated as counsel, adviser or material witness
concerning the proceeding or expressed an opinion concerning the
merits of the particular case in controversy;
(4) He knows that he, individually or as a fiduciary, or his
spouse or minor child residing in his household, has a financial
interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to
the proceeding, or any other interest that could be substantially
affected by the outcome of the proceeding;
(5) He or his spouse, or a person within the third degree of
relationship to either of them, or the spouse of such a person:
(i) Is a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, or
trustee of a party;
(ii) Is acting as a lawyer in the proceeding;
(iii) Is known by the judge to have an interest that could be
substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding;
(iv) Is to the judge's knowledge likely to be a material
witness in the proceeding.
(c) A judge should inform himself about his personal and
fiduciary financial interests, and make a reasonable effort to
inform himself about the personal financial interests of his spouse
and minor children residing in his household.
(d) For the purposes of this section the following words or
phrases shall have the meaning indicated:
(1) "proceeding" includes pretrial, trial, appellate review, or
other stages of litigation;
(2) the degree of relationship is calculated according to the
civil law system;
(3) "fiduciary" includes such relationships as executor,
administrator, trustee, and guardian;
(4) "financial interest" means ownership of a legal or
equitable interest, however small, or a relationship as director,
adviser, or other active participant in the affairs of a party,
(i) Ownership in a mutual or common investment fund that
holds securities is not a "financial interest" in such
securities unless the judge participates in the management of
(ii) An office in an educational, religious, charitable,
fraternal, or civic organization is not a "financial interest"
in securities held by the organization;
(iii) The proprietary interest of a policyholder in a mutual
insurance company, of a depositor in a mutual savings
association, or a similar proprietary interest, is a "financial
interest" in the organization only if the outcome of the
proceeding could substantially affect the value of the
(iv) Ownership of government securities is a "financial
interest" in the issuer only if the outcome of the proceeding
could substantially affect the value of the securities.
(e) No justice, judge, or magistrate judge shall accept from the
parties to the proceeding a waiver of any ground for
disqualification enumerated in subsection (b). Where the ground for
disqualification arises only under subsection (a), waiver may be
accepted provided it is preceded by a full disclosure on the record
of the basis for disqualification.
(f) Notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this section, if
any justice, judge, magistrate judge, or bankruptcy judge to whom a
matter has been assigned would be disqualified, after substantial
judicial time has been devoted to the matter, because of the
appearance or discovery, after the matter was assigned to him or
her, that he or she individually or as a fiduciary, or his or her
spouse or minor child residing in his or her household, has a
financial interest in a party (other than an interest that could be
substantially affected by the outcome), disqualification is not
required if the justice, judge, magistrate judge, bankruptcy judge,
spouse or minor child, as the case may be, divests himself or
herself of the interest that provides the grounds for the
04-19-2011, 03:25 PM
- Join Date
- Mar 2010
Sherillyn Ifill mines the history of recusal motions filed before African-American judges:
In the late 1970s and early 1980s -- as a bumper crop of minority federal district judges appointed by President Jimmy Carter presided over employment-discrimination cases brought under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 -- recusal motions were filed by defendants seeking to remove black judges from hearing these cases. Black judges pushed back firmly against attempts to question their impartiality and framed what has become the universally accepted understanding among the bench and bar: that judicial bias cannot be assumed based on the racial, gender or other status of the judge.
In perhaps the most famous of these cases, lawyers representing the New York law firm of Sullivan & Cromwell requested that federal district judge Constance Baker Motley recuse herself from hearing a case brought by women lawyers at the firm who charged discrimination in hiring and promotion. The law firm's motion for recusal was based on Judge Motley's status as a black woman and her professional experience as a former civil rights lawyer.... Motley refused to withdraw from presiding over the case, offering the now classic explanation that "if background or sex or race of each judge were, by definition, sufficient grounds for removal, no judge on this court could hear this case, or many others, by virtue of the fact that all of them were attorneys, of a sex, often with distinguished law firm or public service backgrounds."
- Join Date
- Apr 2005
04-19-2011, 03:43 PMSolve a man's problem with violence and help him for a day. Teach a man how to solve his problems with violence, help him for a lifetime - Belkar Bitterleaf
Liberalism is what the stupid think is smart.
04-19-2011, 08:22 PM
- Join Date
- Nov 2010
- Peoples Democratic Socialist Republic of Michiganistanovia
Lets see here...
Country over 14 trillion in debt and rising.
Politicians in both parties selling out to corporostatism.
Illegal aliens swarming over the borders.
Islamofacists wanting to kill everybody including themselves.
3 military actions to keep one group of muslims from killing another group of muslims, which they will do eventually anyway.
Schools that don't teach.
Government workers, union or otherwise, that want more money for less work.
Cities, states and local governments that can't fund fire or police services.
And I am concerned that some gay judge that everyone knew was gay overturned a vote to define marriage as only between a man and a woman when the government has no business being involved anyway?
Not even in the top 50.
04-19-2011, 10:49 PM-
In actual dollars, President Obama’s $4.4 trillion in deficit spending in just three years is 37 percent higher than the previous record of $3.2 trillion (held by President George W. Bush) in deficit spending for an entire presidency. It’s no small feat to demolish an 8-year record in just 3 years.
Under Obama’s own projections, interest payments on the debt are on course to triple from 2010 (his first budgetary year) to 2018, climbing from $196 billion to $685 billion annually.
|« Previous Thread | Next Thread »|