Vaughn Walker
From Judgepedia
Contents |
A native of Illinois, Walker graduated from the University of Michigan with his Bachelor's Degree in 1966 and later graduated from Stanford Law School with his Juris Doctor Degree in 1970. [1]
Legal career
Walker served as a law clerk for federal judge Robert Kelleher in the United States District Court for the Central District of California from 1971 to 1972 before spending the rest of his pre-judicial legal career as a private practice attorney in California from 1972 to 1990. [1]
Federal judicial career
On the recommendation of U.S. Senator Pete Wilson, Walker was nominated by President George H.W. Bush on September 7, 1989 to a seat vacated by Spencer Williams. Walker was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on November 21, 1989 on unanimous consent and received commission on November 27, 1989. Walker has served as the chief judge of the court since 2004. [1][2]
Notable cases
Bush 43 warrantless wiretaps
Judge Walker is presiding in a case over warrantless wiretaps that happened when George W. Bush was President. The Al-Haramain Islamic Foundation is suing the the United States Department of Justice that the warrantless wiretap program violated the Constitution of the United States after the group was investigated over a possible link to Al Qadea. On September 23, 2009, Justice Department attorneys asked the case to be dismissed, but Judge Walker found that there is evidence that would find the Justice Department liable for illegal wiretapping. [3]
Proposition 8 federal lawsuit
A federal lawsuit alleges that California's Proposition 8, which forbids same-sex marriage in California, and was approved by voters in the November 2008 election, is unconstitutional. This lawsuit landed on Judge Walker's desk in June 2009, including a request that his court issue a federal injunction suspending Proposition 8.
Walker spoke about the case on June 30. Some of his remarks and reactions include:
- The case raises issues that might need to be considered at a trial, "including the history of discrimination against gays and lesbians and the intent and effects of the state constitutional amendment."[4]
- He said he was not inclined to issue an injunction but instead to move speedily to a trial.
- Blocking or suspending Proposition 8 before a trial might "inject still further uncertainty in an important area of concern and interest to the state and its citizens."[5]
Walker's position that a trial is needed was unpopular with Brian Raum, an attorney for the Alliance Defense Fund who is representing the sponsors of Proposition 8. Raum said he doesn't think a trial is necessary because the only issues he believes should be in dispute are issues of law.[4]
On July 2, 2009, Judge Walker moved to give fast-track status to the lawsuit in which plaintiffs seek to overturn Proposition 8. Judge Walker agreed to let proponents for Proposition 8 to intervene in the case to defend the validity of the measure while California Attorney General Jerry Brown repeatedly claimed that the measure was unconstitutional. [6]
During the hour long hearing that took place in a packed courtroom, Judge Walker ordered the parties involved in the case to file by August 7, 2009 their case management proposals laying out the facts they agree on, the facts that still need to be tried, and a plan on how to proceed the case. [6]
On August 14, 2009, the judge asked both sides to issue their final briefs on how to proceed on the Proposition 8 case as there could be a possibility the case may move on without a trial. Both sides have been divisive on which additional litigants should be involved in the case as the main roadblock towards moving to trial. The two sides have agreed to be the only litigants in the case despite the City of San Francisco and other gay advocacy groups that want in on the case. [7]
On August 19, 2009, Judge Walker approved the case management plans of both sides and set a trial date for January 11, 2010 in which the judge will hear arguments from both sides in a full jury trial. However, the judge rejected motions to allow additional litigants in the case including some gay rights advocacy groups and the City of San Francisco. Judge Walker felt that by allowing additional litigants in the case, it would deprive the right of a speedy trial for both sides. [8]
Later, on October 2, 2009, Judge Walker ordered supporters of Proposition 8 to hand over their campaign strategy documents to the judge. Judge Walker is examining the campaign documents to see if supporters of Prop 8 acted in a matter of prejudice. If Judge Walker finds the ballot measure was discriminatory, then the ballot measure's results could be invalidated[9]. Backers of Proposition 8 filed a motion to gut the January trial over past Supreme Court of the United States precedent[10]. On October 14, 2009, Judge Walker dismissed the motion in which the trial is still moving towards its January 2010 date[11].
An appeal was filed to the Judge's order to hand over campaign strategy documents on Proposition 8. Groups in favor of the ban on gay marriage in California, appealed the ruling over issues of freedom of speech and percieved harrassment. The Judge ruled on October 23, 2009 that there was not enough evidence beyond a reasonable doubt to stop his order[12].
Judge Walker has been open to the idea of having television cameras carry coverage of the Proposition 8 trial, but supporters of Proposition 8 are opposed to the idea claiming witnesses may be intimidated. The idea to have the trial be televised comes after the Ninth Circuit has been experimenting with television coverage of non-jury trials in 2009. Also, television networks like TruTV (formerly Court TV) support the idea of having the trial televised[13].
On January 6, 2010, Judge Walker announced that the trial will be televised over YouTube[14].
References
- ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 Judge Walker's Biography from the Federal Judicial Center.
- ↑ "THOMAS" Nomination of Vaughn Walker, February 11, 2009
- ↑ "Courthouse News Service" Federal Judge Hears Arguments on Bush's Warrantless Wiretaps, September 24, 2009
- ↑ 4.0 4.1 San Francisco Chronicle", "Federal judge taking long look at Prop. 8", July 1, 2009
- ↑ Los Angeles Times, "Preliminary injunction to block Proposition 8 is unlikely", July 1, 2009
- ↑ 6.0 6.1 "San Jose Mercury News" Federal judge fast-tracks lawsuit seeking to overturn same-sex marriage ban, July 2, 2009
- ↑ "San Francisco Chronicle" Federal judge reviews arguments in Prop. 8 case, August 16, 2009
- ↑ "Bay Windows" Prop. 8 trial scheduled for Jan. 11, August 20, 2009
- ↑ "San Francisco Chronicle" Judge to Prop. 8 backers: Turn over your papers, October 3, 2009
- ↑ "San Jose Mercury News" Proposition 8 case headed back to court, October 11, 2009
- ↑ "CBS 5" Federal judge declines to dismiss Proposition 8 Lawsuit, October 14, 2009
- ↑ "San Francisco Chronicle" Judge denies Prop. 8 backers delay on memos, October 26, 2009
- ↑ "Examiner" California gay marriage trial may be televised, January 2, 2009
- ↑ "California Progress Report" Federal Judge Rules Prop 8 Trial Will Be Broadcast Via YouTube, January 6, 2010
 |
Federal judges of the United States District Court for the Northern District of California |
|---|---|
| Active judges |
Walker • Alsup • Armstrong • Breyer • Fogel • Hamilton • Illston • Koh • Seeborg • Ware • White • Wilken • Vacancy • Vacancy |
| Senior judges |
Chesney • Conti • Henderson • Jensen • Patel • Schwarzer • Whyte |
| Magistrate judges |
Larson • Brazil • Chen • James • LaPorte • Lloyd • Spero • Trumbull • Zimmerman |
| Former judges |
Aguilar • Burke • Carter • Caulfield • DeHaven • Dooling • Erskine • Friedman • Goodman • Halbert • Hamlin • Harris • Hoffman • Ingram • Jenkins • Kerrigan • Legge • Lemmon • Levin • Louderback • Lynch • MacBride • Morrow • Murphy • Orrick • Partridge • Peckham • Poole • Renfrew • Roche • Schnacke • Smith • St. Sure • Sweigert • Van Fleet • Vukasin • Weigel • Welsh • Williams • Wollenberg • Zirpoli |
 |
The California Project on Judgepedia
|
