I remember a mob beating up an unpopular guy. I walked up to him and asked him if what they were accusing him of was true. I remember the pleading look on his face when he pleaded his innocence. It was something I won’t forget.
And so if you’re wondering, why would I be defending a judge who recused himself from marrying interracial couples? That’s part of it. I hate mob mentality. Given the media’s propensity to generate a salacious headline, and plenty of recent evidence of their willingness to propagate slander or present deliberately misleading stories, it seems to me that on this one, they either didn’t do their homework, or refused to present it fairly.
Think about jury selection. What do they do? They ask questions to determine if a potential juror has a bias, or can not function impartially in weighing a case. If the juror can’t be impartial, the juror is dismissed from the case. By the way, you may recall a recent Supreme Court Justice who admitted a bias, but it wasn’t enough to deny her the job.
In any event, I haven’t seen a single news story that presented any research beyond opinion gathering. That’s the state of journalism today.
Here’s the link to Loving v. Virginia which prohibits statutory laws banning interracial marriage (miscegenation) that some news sources are quoting. It’s irrelevant. This isn’t a statutory ban. It’s one man admitting he can’t be impartial and recusing himself, as he should, according to the Louisiana Code of Judicial Ethics.