Comments on: An Outing That Isn’t? http://lawdork.net/2010/02/12/an-outing-that-isnt/ Same dork, new year! Thu, 13 Jan 2011 15:38:37 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.1 hourly 1 By: Joseph Wheeler http://lawdork.net/2010/02/12/an-outing-that-isnt/#comment-7028 Joseph Wheeler Tue, 16 Feb 2010 17:25:11 +0000 http://lawdork.net/?p=4758#comment-7028 There's no shame in being gay, and thus no offense in discussing a person's sexual orientation, especially if they are already out. There's also not necessarily good reason to expect bias. If sexual orientation were grounds for recusal, heterosexual judges would presumably also be biased in a case where they would have the ability to maintain their monopoly on marriage. There’s no shame in being gay, and thus no offense in discussing a person’s sexual orientation, especially if they are already out.

There’s also not necessarily good reason to expect bias. If sexual orientation were grounds for recusal, heterosexual judges would presumably also be biased in a case where they would have the ability to maintain their monopoly on marriage.

]]> By: FlexSF http://lawdork.net/2010/02/12/an-outing-that-isnt/#comment-7009 FlexSF Sat, 13 Feb 2010 18:10:24 +0000 http://lawdork.net/?p=4758#comment-7009 I've read in the LA TImes that Carol Corrigan is a lesbian. She is a California Supreme Court justice, and we all know how she ruled in that decision. Conversely, she never mentioned her sexuality in her dissent, or any other justice! I’ve read in the LA TImes that Carol Corrigan is a lesbian. She is a California Supreme Court justice, and we all know how she ruled in that decision. Conversely, she never mentioned her sexuality in her dissent, or any other justice!

]]>