In a ruling on the Prop 8 case, a federal court judge has found no valid reason to hide videotapes of the trial that found Prop 8 unconstitutional, and has ordered them released — on September 30. Chief U.S. District Court Judge James Ware found “no compelling reasons” to continue to keep the tapes from the public, and called the anti-gay Prop 8 supporters’ claims that witnesses testified in favor of Prop 8 might suffer harm from Prop 8 opponents an “unsupported hypothesis.”
Which means, Maggie Gallagher of the National Organization For Marriage (NOM), Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council (FRC), the Alliance Defense Fund (ADF), ProtectMarriage.com, and all the other “family” anti-gay groups can band together and file a motion to appeal this appealed ruling, all the way to the Supreme Court if they like.
Let them. The more cash they spend on senseless arguments that have already been twice decided is cash they don’t have to spend creating lies like this.
Pam Spaulding asks, “Imagine what gold can be mined from those tapes to fight amendment efforts and to bolster marriage equality in states where there is a prospect of it!”
Towleroad notes,
The San Diego Gay & Lesbian News reported on the late August hearing:
David Thompson, an attorney for the Prop 8 supporters, contended that the release of the videotape would put their two star witnesses in harm’s way because their faces and voices would become publicly known. AFER attorneys argued that because the two witnesses are already publicly known because they have frequently testified for anti-gay groups in trials. Furthermore, the AFER attorneys noted that the two witnesses have not been “intimidated†in any way since the Prop 8 trial last year.
And Politico expands,
Same-sex marriage opponents had sought to keep the trial recording under wraps, citing what they contended were assurances from the judge who handled the trial and later retired, Vaughn Walker. Those opposing public release of the video also argued that release was effectively barred by a Supreme Court order overturning plans for a live, closed-circuit broadcast of the trial to various courthouses across the country.
However, Ware said that the Supreme Court ruling didn’t amount to a requirement to seal the video and that the recording had been used both by the judge and at trial.
“The Court finds that the record does not support the contention that Judge Walker limited the digital recording to chambers use only,” Ware wrote. “Judge Walker, without objection, made copies of the digital recording available to the parties for use during closing arguments….At least two of the parties obtained copies of the digital recording, and one of the parties played segments on the record during closing argument in open court.”