Patterico's Pontifications


Reinhardt Refuses to Disqualify Himself from Proposition 8 Case

Filed under: General — Aaron Worthing @ 11:32 am

[Guest post by Aaron Worthing; if you have tips, please send them here.]

Ed Whelan, who has been all over this Proposition 8 case, reports that pro-Prop-8 forces filed a motion yesterday asking Judge Reinhardt to disqualify himself.  You can read it here, but it has already been refused.  And you can read more background on the issue, here.

I suppose Reinhardt interpreted the canons of judicial conduct as a living document.

Joking aside, I will wait to read his full explanation when he provides it, but it had better be good.  And if it is not satisfactory, I am ready to file an official complaint.  I am sick of these shenanigans.

[Posted and authored by Aaron Worthing.]

17 Responses to “Reinhardt Refuses to Disqualify Himself from Proposition 8 Case”

  1. I’ll withhold final judgment until I can read Reinhardt’s memorandum of law, but if Whalen’s reportage is correct and complete — and I have no reason to think it’s not — then Reinhardt seems to be on the wrong side of this.

    Kman (d30fc3)

  2. Correct me but didn’t Reinhardt sit in the audience during the trial?

    Arizona Bob (f57a20)

  3. Automatic basis for appeal.

    LarryD (f22286)

  4. Kman for once we agree. Trust but verify is the watchword.

    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  5. Aaron Worthing:

    File an official complaint? I thought you live in Texas, which is (mumble mumble google mumble) Fifth Circuit.

    Or is it that you used to live in Texas, but now you live in Alaska, Arizona, California, Hawaii, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, Guam, or the Northern Mariana Islands?

    (There is a third option, of course: That you never lived in Texas, never passed through Texas, never even heard of Texas — and I just hallucinated the whole sorry incident. Hm…)


    Dafydd the Geographically Puzzled (632d00)

  6. Aaron again:

    I’m not trying to pin you down or “out” your address, but I hope that admitting you live somewhere in the Western United States does not reveal sufficient information to be worrisome…

    (I’ve always been willing to say I’m a Californio; in fact I admit living in Southern California — alongside 24 million other people.)


    Dafydd the Geographically Puzzled (632d00)

  7. Dafydd

    I don’t think you have to be a californian to complain, but i guess that is the first question.

    But actually you are confused about where i live, partially because my backstory is confusing.

    I was born in pennsylvania. Then i moved to NC. Then i moved to Texas. Then to Cali. Then back to PA, back to NC, back to Texas. By then i was graduating college and looking at law schools. i was accepted at Berkley, but i thought, “I can’t go to california. then i would be officially doing laps!” So i went to connecticut and then to Northern VA (really more like the greater D.C. area).


    Aaron Worthing (e7d72e)

  8. Aaron:

    So I was right that you have spoken of living in Texas (in the past tense); and it does appear that you live currently in a D.C. bedroom community (the rich-people’s side, not the poor-people’s side, which would be Maryland, I believe).

    Is a non-resident of the 9th allowed to file a formal complaint against a judge of the 9th? If not, is an ordinary, non-lawyer citizen of California allowed to file a bar complaint?

    I voted for Proposition 8 (and Prop 22 before that), and I believe that my vote is being rendered valueless by a biased judge, Stephen Reinhardt, who not only refuses to recuse himself, he can’t wait to get this case so he can vote to affirm the ruling that Prop 8 violates the United States Constitution… no matter what evidence or argument is put to him.

    If you can’t lodge a formal complaint, can I? Or must one be an attorney to complain to the California bar, or to whomever one should complain?


    Dafydd the Geographically Puzzled but Slightly Vindicated (632d00)

  9. Can the parties lodge a complaint?

    Michael Ejercito (249c90)

  10. can Reinhardt be taken out back and be beaten with a stick for unnecessary stupidity?

    redc1c4 (fb8750)

  11. dafydd

    Now you got my mental juices flowing, more of the rules here is coming back to me.

    First, i am 90% sure there is a special disciplinary track for federal judges. there is, after all, a federal code of judicial conduct which is at the center of all this discussion. its similar to state versions, but these are rules they are uniquely held to.

    Second, as far as state bar discipline is concerned, you don’t even have to be a member of the bar to report a lawyer. I have filed complaints against a lawyer who was breaking the rules in three separate jurisdictions, where i was only admitted in 2 (he was practicing law while his license was suspended).

    Now maybe Cali has unique rules, but i don’t think so.

    Incidentally, my location ain’t a secret. Manassas, Virginia, which isn’t poor, but isn’t super rich either. And there are plenty of rich places in MD, at least around DC. Not to mention some of the obscene prices for real estate in DC itself, in the nice parts.



    absolutely they can.

    Aaron Worthing (b8e056)

  12. 100 bucks says he cites Scalia’s decision refusing to recuse in that litigation about Cheney’s energy meetings.

    I’m not saying that is relevant. It will just be a fuck you. And Reinhardt is all about that.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  13. Manassas, Virginia

    No one calls it Bull Run?

    The North has truly won.

    kishnevi (50815b)

  14. kish

    bull run is the battlefield and the river.

    manassas is the city. you don’t live on a battlefield or a river.


    ain’t no way i am taking that bet.

    Aaron Worthing (b8e056)

  15. I just re-read Scalia’s memo and it is well-reasoned and provides absolutely no support whatsoever for Reinhardt’s decision not to recuse himself.

    I am more confident than ever that Reinhardt will cite it prominently.

    Patterico (c218bd)

  16. Dont sugar coat it Pat, tell us how you really feel 🙂

    So let me understand this, Calfornians vote on a referendum, an interest group sues, one of the parties to the Lawsut is the JUDGES WIFE….

    have I got it so far?

    EricPWJohnson (8a4ca7)

Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.1880 secs.