The mere fact that a judge is in a relationship with another person — whether of the same sex or the opposite sex — does not ipso facto imply that the judge must be so interested in marrying that person that he would be unable to exhibit the impartiality which, it is presumed, all federal judges maintain.U.S. District Court Chief James Ware • Explaining his ruling that retired Judge Vaughn Walker, a gay man who ruled against California’s Proposition 8 in court, should not have had to remove himself from the case. This is a major victory for gay-rights advocates, and the legal opponents of Proposition 8; its supporters had argued that Walker’s long-term relationship with another man biased his judgment in the case, as he might want to get married. Walker’s ruling against Prop. 8 is still on hold pending a circuit court appeal. source (via • follow)
» And for the ACLU, there was much rejoicing: The American Civil Liberties Union had taken on the case of two middle school girls suspended from school for wearing breast cancer awareness bracelets with “I (heart) boobies” written on them. In a preliminary ruling, federal judge Mary McLaughlin said they “can reasonably be viewed as speech designed to raise awareness of breast cancer and to reduce stigma associated with openly discussing breast health.”
» What happened: A state appeals court ruled that while Rahm owned property in Chicago for the requisite amount of time necessary (one year), he wasn’t actually living there, and thus is ineligible for the election. In a world in which rivals sometimes accuse each other of being “carpet-baggers,” it probably stings to have an official ruling saying so.