Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Jindal, Landrieu call for removal of judge who wouldn't perform interracial marriage

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-17-09 11:29 AM
Original message
Jindal, Landrieu call for removal of judge who wouldn't perform interracial marriage
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/63543-jindal-landrieu-call-for-judges-removal

Jindal, Landrieu call for judge's removal
By Tony Romm - 10/17/09 10:09 AM ET


Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal and Sen. Mary Landrieu (D) are now calling on their state's judicial review board to oust a judge who refused earlier this month to perform an interracial marriage.

Keith Bardwell, a justice of the peace in local Tangipahoa Parish, has captured headlines -- and national attention -- after refusing to marry local residents Beth Humhprey and Terence McKay out of "concern... for the children," he explained in a recent interview.

"I'm not a racist," Bardwell stressed last week. "I do ceremonies for black couples right here in my house."

The judge's defense, however, has hardly swayed some of his state's top lawmakers, who are enraged by his decision. On Friday, both Jindal and Landrieu separately called for an investigation into the judge's conduct -- and asked for his prompt removal from the bench.

The governor in his statement charged the judge's action was discriminatory and said it constituted a "violation of constitutional rights and federal and state law."

“Disciplinary action should be taken immediately — including the revoking of his license,” Jindal added.

Landrieu concurred with the governor. “Not only does his decision directly contradict Supreme Court rulings, it is an example of the ugly bigotry that divided our country for too long,” she explained.

The Louisiana Judiciary Committee, however, has not indicated whether it will in any way sanction Bardwell for his conduct. Investigations are confidential until the panel recommends action to the state's Supreme Court, its spokesperson told the Shreveport Times.

Meanwhile, the Obama administration too has signaled its dissatisfaction with the incident. Although press spokesman Bill Burton would not say on Friday whether the president agrees with the heightened calls for Bardwell's ouster, he did note: “I’ve found that actually the children of biracial couples can do pretty good.”
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
TexasObserver Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-17-09 11:29 AM
Response to Original message
1. Somewhere they're drawing up a complaint for the Judicial Conduct Commission.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yellowcanine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-17-09 11:31 AM
Response to Original message
2. It is time to outlaw use of "for the children" as an excuse for bad behavior.
Edited on Sat Oct-17-09 11:39 AM by yellowcanine
That is all.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-17-09 11:35 AM
Response to Reply #2
4. Do you mean like for child support payment laws or for environmental laws?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yellowcanine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-17-09 11:38 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. No-I mean as an excuse for what would otherwise be considered bad behavior. I will edit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-17-09 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #2
9. There is much evil done in their name.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
enid602 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-17-09 12:30 PM
Response to Reply #2
13. biracial
The last time i was in Louisiana, it seemed that a lot of people there are biracial. From whom does this fool of a judge think he's protecting the children?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-17-09 03:11 PM
Response to Reply #13
16. There's more than one way to be "biracial". Often mixed black & white people don't get along.
for instance...
:rofl: Made ya look!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-17-09 03:01 PM
Response to Reply #2
15. That's just a cover-up to make this seem less overtly racial. But
it didn't work for me. Just look at the President...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bucky Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-17-09 11:33 AM
Response to Original message
3. Loving vs Virginia
Marriage is one of the "basic civil rights of man," fundamental to our very existence and survival.... To deny this fundamental freedom on so unsupportable a basis as the racial classifications embodied in these statutes, classifications so directly subversive of the principle of equality at the heart of the Fourteenth Amendment, is surely to deprive all the State's citizens of liberty without due process of law.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-17-09 11:35 AM
Response to Original message
5. Bipartisanship at last
!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-17-09 12:17 PM
Response to Reply #5
10. Ain't it grand?! :)nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ginnyinWI Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-17-09 11:37 AM
Response to Original message
6. if it is not against the law to refuse to marry someone--
then they should change the law. Removing the judge isn't really a fix for the situation.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lolly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-17-09 11:42 AM
Response to Reply #6
8. Not for a clergyman
But I don't see how a public official. If part of his official duties are to marry couples who have the appropriate licenses, how can he pick and chose which ones to marry?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Warpy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-17-09 12:23 PM
Response to Reply #6
12. It's against the law for a government official
whether a judge or justice of the peace to discriminate along racial lines.

Ministers can leave their bigotry intact, the law doesn't affect them.

The JP in question just took the wrong job for a bigot.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bumblebee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-17-09 12:22 PM
Response to Original message
11. and what about Mr. Vitter (R)?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
babylonsister Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-17-09 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. He is conspicuously absent, isn't he. He's probably applauding somewhere. nt
Edited on Sat Oct-17-09 12:52 PM by babylonsister
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
spanone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-17-09 03:17 PM
Response to Reply #11
17. very good question, one would think a curious media would ask.....naaaaaaw
Edited on Sat Oct-17-09 03:18 PM by spanone
this fucking judge should be gone yesterday, who the hell does the think he is?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cynatnite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-17-09 03:19 PM
Response to Original message
18. That last line is just perfect! n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 01st 2024, 06:17 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC