- HOME
- About
- Topics
- Angelides
- Arnold Schwarzenegger
- California Attorney General Race
- California Congressional Races
- California Democratic Party
- California Governor Race 2010
- California Legislative Races
- California Lt. Governor Race
- California Secretary of State Race
- California State Budget
- California State Controller
- Campaign Finance Reform
- Campaigns
- Cell Phones
- Children and Families
- Consumer Rights
- Corporate Accountability
- Criminal Justice
- Death With Dignity
- Disaster Preparation
- Discrimination and Civil Rights
- Education
- Elections and Voting
- Electoral College
- Energy
- Environment
- Farm Animal Cruelty Ballot Measure
- Flood Control
- Food Safety
- Gas Prices
- Governor's Election Race
- Gun control
- Health Care
- Health Insurance
- Hiram Johnson's Corner
- Housing
- Human Rights
- Humor
- Immigration
- Infrastructure
- Initiative Reform
- Insurance Commissioner Race
- Labor
- Language and Politics
- Legal System
- Media and Communication
- Minimum Wage
- Open Government
- Pharmaceutical Companies
- Politics
- Preschool
- Presidential Election 2008
- Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act Prop
- Prison Reform
- Privacy
- Privitization
- Prop 11-Redistricting/Reapportionment
- Prop 1A--High Speed Rail
- Prop 2--Treatment of Farm Animals
- Prop 3-Children's Hospital Bonds
- Prop 4 Waiting Period and Parental Notification
- Prop 5--Non-violent drug offenses
- Prop 7 and 10-Alternative Fuel and Energy Bond
- Prop 8 and-Marriage Equality
- Prop 85 Parental Notification
- Prop 86 Tobacco Tax
- Prop 87--Alternative Energy
- Prop 9 Parole
- Prop 90
- Prop 91--Transportation Funding
- Prop 92- Community Colleges
- Prop 93--Term Limits
- Props 94-97--Tribal Gaming
- Props 98 and 99
- Racial Disparities
- Responsible Lending
- Retirement Benefits
- Site of the Day
- Solar Initiative
- Structure of California Government
- Taxes
- Toxic Chemicals
- Transportation/Transit
- Water
- Westly
- Workers' Compensation
- Stories
- Cavala: A Constitutional Convention for California?
- Eight Years From Bush v. Gore to Palin: The Bridge to Nowhere
- California Proposition 11: Redistricting Commission – YES
- What Does a Republican Running in an Increasingly Democratic District Do? Why Aghazarian Wants to Make Legislative Races Non-Partisan
- Prop 1A and High Speed Rail's Role in Fighting Dependence on Oil and Sprawl in California
- Schwarzenegger Vetoes Bill Recommended By Autism Commission
- Governor Schwarzenegger Can Put a Dent in Auto Repair Fraud and Protect Consumers by Signing AB 2825
- California Assembly District 26: Republican Refuses to Debate Eisenhut in Close Race Democrats May Pick Up
- Bankruptcy Relief and the Bailout
- A Renewed Call for Mortgage Reform in California
- Preschool Legislation Aimed at Closing the Achievement Gap in California Becomes Law
- Debate: Opening Advantage Obama
- Directory
- Donate
- Contact Us
RSS Advertise Here
Deliver your message to thousands of readers every day.
Our readers are influential opinion makers - politicians, journalists and activists.
Our latest headlines
- Today’s California College Students: Indentured Servants?
- California Must Find the Funds to Feed Students
- PPIC Prop 8 Poll: Republicans and Evangelicals Motivated to Win
- Two Views on the Failure of the Campaign to Defeat Prop 8 and Optimism for Building a Structure for Victory in 2010
- Democrats Propose Majority Vote for California State Budget, Speaker Creates Accountability Committee
- Congressional Candidate Charlie Brown Concedes, Thanks Supporters, and Reflects on What Was Accomplished
- Looking Beyond Funding In Education Reform
About Us
The California Progress Report is published by Frank D. Russo, a longtime observer of and participant in California politics.
About Frank Russo.
About California Progress Report.
Got a news tip? Want to write a guest column? Contact Frank here.
Sponsors
Books
Will All Judges Who Have Viewed Porn Please Stand Up?
By Peter Scheer
Executive Director
California First Amendment Coalition
As the whole world now knows, federal appeals court judge Alex Kozinski has looked website. This revelation, and the invasion of privacy that it entails, are apparently justified by the fact that Kozinski is currently presiding, as a temporary trial judge, over a high-profile obscenity prosecution in Los Angeles.
Before this public flogging of a gifted jurist proceeds much further, let’s stop to consider that Kozinski has done nothing illegal. The files on his computer, while certainly embarrassing, are constitutionally protected.
Kozinski has the right, under the First Amendment, to possess pornographic materials on his own computer. It is a right that we all have, and for good reason: in a free society, government has no business regulating private choices about what movies to see, books to read or photos to view.
Although Kozinski is a public figure, he has done nothing in his public life to invite this scrutiny of his private life. Former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer had, as a prosecutor, aggressively pursued prostitutes and their customers. Senator Larry Craig, before getting busted for soliciting sex in a public bathroom, had exploited anti-gay sentiment for political advantage. But Kozinski doesn’t fit the role of hypocrite-gets-his-due. He is miscast in this stock morality tale of politics and scandal.
If Kozinski is removed from the LA obscenity trial because he has viewed and owns pornographic materials, then the judge who replaces him and the judges who hear appeals in the case also will have to be screened for exposure to pornography. Do we really want to go down this road?
Even though Kozinski has done nothing wrong, he is being pressed from all sides to disqualify himself from the federal trial of smut producer Ira Isaacs, presumably on the theory that because Kozinski has viewed pornography, and owns pornography, he cannot be objective in making evidentiary and legal rulings in the case.
Fine. But if Kozinski is removed from the case on that basis, any judge assigned to replace him must also be disqualified if he or she has viewed or possesses pornographic materials. Ditto for the appellate judges who will decide the appeals from the obscenity prosecution. Will all the judges be required to consent to an inspection of their hard drives? Will they be interrogated under oath about their sexual tastes and practices?
This, I submit, is not a road that we should go down.
Kozinski has been done a terrible disservice by whoever leaked to news organizations personal files from the judge’s computer and private website. Let’s not compound this unfairness by setting a precedent that we will come to regret.
P.S. Full disclosure: Alex Kozinski is a friend. (A distant friend, but a friend nonetheless.)
Peter Scheer, a lawyer and journalist, is executive director of the California First Amendment Coalition (CFAC). CFAC is a non-profit public interest organization dedicated to enhancing rights to freedom of speech and open government through information and educational services, strategic litigation, and lobbying.
Comments
Post a comment
Get Email Updates
Want the California Progress Report by email? Once a week, we'll send you the latest and greatest headlines.
© 2008 California Progress Report Our copyright and fair use policy.
Powered by Mandate Media. Logo design by Jane Norling.
