Judge's Prop. 8 ruling upheld

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal judge on Tuesday upheld a gay judge's ruling that struck down California's same-sex marriage ban, saying his fellow jurist was under no obligation to disqualify himself simply because he was in a long-term relationship with another man.

In a 19-page decision responding to the first attempt in the nation to disqualify a judge because of his sexual orientation, Chief U.S. District Judge James Ware said former Chief Judge Vaughn Walker had no obligation to divulge whether he wanted to marry his same-sex partner before he declared last year that voter-approved Proposition 8 was unconstitutional.

"The presumption that Judge Walker, by virtue of being in a same-sex relationship, had a desire to be married that rendered him incapable of making an impartial decision, is as warrantless as the presumption that a female judge is incapable of being impartial in a case in which women seek legal relief," Ware wrote.

The ruling does not settle the legal fight over Proposition 8.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals is considering whether Walker properly concluded that denying gays and lesbians the right to marry violates their rights to due process and equal protection.

The court also is eyeing whether the conservative religious coalition that sponsored the 2008 ballot measure is legally entitled to appeal Walker's verdict.

Ware's opinion on Tuesday came in response to an April motion by coalition lawyers that sought to have Walker's ruling vacated on conflict of interest grounds.

Chad Griffin, president of the American Foundation for Equal Rights, the group that spearheaded the successful effort to overturn Proposition 8 in Walker's court, called Ware's decision to reject the challenge a precedent-setting victory that advances equal rights and treatment for all Americans.

"This bigoted and homophobic motion will prove to be a real low point in the struggle for equality and full civil rights for gay and lesbian people," Griffin said.

ProtectMarriage.com, which filed the challenge, said it would appeal and "continue our tireless efforts to defend the will of the people of California to preserve marriage as the union of a man and a woman."

In his ruling, Ware cited previous cases dealing with women and minority judges in concluding that his predecessor had acted appropriately.