NOM Responds to News Judge Walker Violated Judicial Rules, Released Video in Defiance of Supreme Court


“What more evidence do we need that Judge Walker is a rogue judge with little regard for ordinary judicial process and fair play?" - Brian Brown, President

(WASHINGTON, D.C.) – Prop 8 proponents today filed a motion in response to Judge Vaughn Walker’s illegal decision to release part of the videotapes of expert witnesses’ testimony in the Prop 8 trial. In response, Brian Brown, President of the National Organization for Marriage (NOM), released the following statement:

“By releasing the videotape on the eve of leaving the judicial bench, Judge Walker violated a judicial ethic, a clear promise he made to the witnesses, and defied the Supreme Court itself. What more evidence do we need that we have on our hands a rogue judge with little regard for ordinary judicial process and fair play?” said Brian Brown, NOM’s President.

“Allegations of prejudice and the appearance of bias on the part of Judge Walker are becoming increasingly hard to ignore, given this reckless disregard of normal judicial rules of behavior,” added Brown.

Key excerpts from the Motion:

On February 18, 2011, Judge Walker delivered a speech at the University of Arizona in which he played a portion of the video recording of the cross- examination of one of Proponents’ expert witnesses in the trial of this case. The speech was video taped by C-SPAN, and it was subsequently broadcast on C- SPAN several times beginning on March 22 ... The speech is available for viewing on C-SPAN’s website.

By publicly displaying the video recording of a portion of the trial testimony, Judge Walker (1) violated his own order placing the video recording of the trial under seal; (2) ignored the clear terms of the district court’s Local Rule 77-1-3, which prohibits the broadcast or other transmission of trial proceedings beyond “the confines of the courthouse”; (3) contravened the longstanding policies of the Judicial Conference of the United States and the Judicial Council of this Court prohibiting public broadcast of trial proceedings; and (4) defied the United States Supreme Court’s prior decision in this case ruling that an earlier attempt by then- Chief Judge Walker to publicly broadcast the trial proceedings “complied neither with existing rules or policies nor the required procedures for amending them.”

The Motion can be read in its entirety here.