Judge won’t hear gay adoptions because it’s not in a child’s ‘best interest’

May 1, 2017

By Andrew Wolfson

A family court judge who sits in Barren and Metcalfe counties has announced he will no longer hear adoption cases involving “homosexual parties” because he believes allowing a gay person to adopt could never be in the child’s best interest.

Judge W. Mitchell Nance, who begins court each day by requiring everyone to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance, said in an order this week that he would recuse himself from all adoptions involving gay people.

Nance cited a judicial ethics rule that says a judge must disqualify himself when he has a personal bias or prejudice.

He said in the order issued Thursday that “as a matter of conscience” he believes that “under no circumstance” would “the best interest of the child be promoted by the adoption by a practicing homosexual.” Kentucky state law allows gay couples to adopt, and the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2015 that all states must permit same-sex marriage.

Continue reading by clicking the name of the source below.

6 comments on “Judge won’t hear gay adoptions because it’s not in a child’s ‘best interest’

  • Sounds to me like a complete asshole who has recognized that they are a complete asshole and done us all the service of recusing themselves from cases that could/should/would be overturned at some point in the future. this saves time/money/bullshit/heartache.

    contrast this with the fuckheads that won’t serve a CAKE to a homosexual because of their “beliefs”. Forget that their “Jesus” washed the feet of whores.

    At least this shitwad realizes that he is a shitwad and has eliminated himself from CONCLUDING IN A COMPLETELY STUPID DIRECTION.



    Report abuse

  • Kentucky state law allows gay couples to adopt… He said in the
    order issued Thursday, that “as a matter of conscience” he believes
    that “under no circumstance” would “the best interest of the child be
    promoted by the adoption by a practicing homosexual.”

    Could this behavior start a domino effect in other judges? Like with gynecologists here in this stupid croatia and in Italy (and perhaps other European countries; I do not have data) when they do not want to preform abortion relying on “matter of conscience”.

    It would be frightering seeing other judges behaving in the same way. It would perhaps cause an issue (fairly widespread practice) that only new law that would ban existing law wich allows gay couples to adopt? Who knows, perhaps this disqualification could provoke more of them, and eventualy a pressure on law from a caste of a judges. I hope not, but I have seen similar scenario in gynecologists (supported from church in shadow).



    Report abuse

  • If he can’t impartially uphold the laws of his state, or the country, then maybe he should resign rather than just recuse himself from hearing cases involving laws he doesn’t like. Justice is supposed to be blind but in the USA it’s often deaf, dumb and stupid too.



    Report abuse

  • … then maybe he should resign rather than just recuse himself from
    hearing cases involving laws he doesn’t like.

    I agree. Although, we know he is not going to do so by himself. He should be removed from his working place (another question who has ingerence to do so). I supose, Trump, or any capitalist would not tolerate such behaviour in their own companies, and person would be removed from company. But this irresponsible behavior is acceptable in ‘state’ companies,… and we are supose to accept their irresponsability. 🙁 Unfortunately, servants of the state do not experience themselves as tools for public service,…they see themselves more as ones who has gain office and a power to run their own (personal) opinion. 🙁 Criminal and sad.



    Report abuse

  • @OP – A family court judge who sits in Barren and Metcalfe counties has announced he will no longer hear adoption cases involving “homosexual parties” because he believes allowing a gay person to adopt could never be in the child’s best interest.

    Nance cited a judicial ethics rule that says a judge must disqualify himself when he has a personal bias or prejudice.

    Just as when someone has a religious or commercial affiliation or vested interest in an item requiring judgement, it is correct to recognise the potential bias and hand the case to someone impartial.

    This is a far more moral position than someone who clandestinely exercises their prejudices or hidden interests to pervert the outcome!

    This is very much a lesson which is yet to be recognised and implemented in the White House!

    Judge W. Mitchell Nance, who begins court each day by requiring everyone to stand for the Pledge of Allegiance,

    I wonder how that is supposed to work on cases such as the robbing of tourists, or assaults on foreign nationals?



    Report abuse

  • @OP Judge won’t hear gay adoptions because it’s not in a child’s ‘best interest’

    According to a US judge who is alleged to be competent at considering evidence!

    Meanwhile in Germany despite some right-wing Christian opposition:-

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-40441712
    A clear majority of German MPs have voted to legalise same-sex marriage, days after Chancellor Angela Merkel dropped her opposition to a vote.

    The reform grants couples now limited to civil unions full marital rights, and allows them to adopt children.

    Mrs Merkel’s political opponents were strongly in favour. But the chancellor, who signalled her backing for a free vote only on Monday, voted against.

    The bill was backed by 393 lawmakers, 226 voted against and four abstained.

    The German legal code will now read: “Marriage is entered into for life by two people of different or the same sex”, AFP news agency reported.

    Following Friday’s vote, Mrs Merkel said that for her marriage was between a man and a woman. But she said she hoped the passing of the bill would lead to more “social cohesion and peace”.

    During her 2013 election campaign, Mrs Merkel argued against gay marriage on the grounds of “children’s welfare,” and admitted that she had a “hard time” with the issue.

    But in an on-stage interview with the women’s magazine Brigitte on 26 June, she shocked the German media by saying, in response to an audience member’s question, that she had noted other parties’ support for gay marriage, and would allow a free vote at an unspecified time in the future.

    Mrs Merkel’s current coalition partners – the centre-left Social Democrats (SPD), who are trailing Mrs Merkel’s Christian Democrats (CDU) in opinion polls – then seized the political initiative.

    They called for a vote by the time parliament went into summer recess at the end of the week – prompting Mrs Merkel to complain she’d been “ambushed”.

    Does same-sex marriage have popular support?

    Yes – a recent survey by the government’s anti-discrimination agency found that 83% of Germans were in favour of marriage equality.



    Report abuse

Leave a Reply

View our comment policy.