SAN FRANCISCO — The California Supreme Court’s unanimous decision to prohibit state judges from belonging to the Boy Scouts and other youth groups that practice “invidious” discrimination against gays came against the wishes of some jurists with children who are Boy Scouts or who are active in Scouting themselves.
Several sitting judges wrote to oppose the new membership policy before the court approved it on Friday, the Los Angeles Times reported Sunday.
Among them was San Joaquin County Superior Court Barbara Kronlund, who said that as the mother of a Boy Scout the policy would be an “infringement of my right to free exercise of religion as guaranteed by the First Amendment.”
Riverside County Superior Court Judge John Vineyard commented that his being an Eagle Scout and Scoutmaster was in no way incompatible with serving on the bench.
Never Miss a Beat
Subscribe to our newsletter to stay ahead of the latest LGBTQ+ political news and insights.
“The involvement of judges in Scouting reflects well on the judiciary and supports a widely respected youth organization with a rich and unique place in American culture,” Vineyard said in written comments quoted by the Times.
The Boy Scouts of America started allowing openly gay boys to be Scouts last year, but does not permit gay adults to be leaders.
California is one of 22 states where judges are not allowed to be members of groups and clubs that discriminate on the basis of sexual orientation, but until last week it had an exception for nonprofit youth groups that the Supreme Court said would end next January. The rule does not apply to religious organizations.
Article continues below
The change was supported by the California Judges Association.
Permitting judges to participate in groups like the Boy Scouts “incites distrust in judicial impartiality, demeans gay and lesbian judges and is offensive and harmful,” Jim Humes, an openly gay appeals court judge in San Francisco, told the court.
This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.