City can't refute homophobic libels?

In the current same-sex marriage case,
SF Superior Court Judge Richard Kramer
always said this dispute
is about questions of law,
not about questions of fact.

So he didn't invite testimony about same-sex couples,
queer families, or other factual matters related to this issue.
Lawyers for California (anti-marriage)
and San Francisco (pro-marriage)
followed the judge's orders,
and generally stuck to arguing about law.

But lawyers for private fundi-fascist groups
cleverly sneaked some
pseudo-facts into the record, anyway.
They circumvented the judge's restrictions
by attaching affidavits to their legal arguments.
These sworn statements, by so-called experts,
made negative factual claims about
the fitness of same-sex couples as child-raisers,
whether queers are sane, and so on.

Now the City of SF wants permission to refute
those misleading statements.
But the judge says Don't.

In narrow technical terms of efficiency and speed,
the judge may be correct. Who knows?

But in broader historical and political terms,
having a one-sided record is unfortunate and unfair.

Are pro-marriage lawyers
(especially those representing queer couples)
now regretfully wishing
that they too had attached affidavits to their legal arguments?

Oops!

-- Tuesday Morning Queer Quarterback
28 December 2004
................................................................

For an objective report on this matter
(unlike the frankly biased rant above),
please see

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2004/12/28/BAGT0AHU9B1.DTL

Bob Egelko
"S.F. can't challenge 'mental disorder' argument....",
S.F. Chronicle.
28 Dec. 2004, Tuesday,
page B-1.
..............