Kenneth P. Miller
Encyclopedia
Kenneth P. Miller is a political science professor at Claremont McKenna College
. He specializes in California politics.
Miller has a BA from Pomona College, a JD from Harvard Law School
and a Ph.D. in political science from the University of California at Berkeley.
Miller is the author of Direct Democracy and the Courts which is a work that examines how referendums should be weighed in a court of law.
in Perry v. Schwarzenegger
by the defendant-intervenors, proponents of California Proposition 8 (2008)
, a constitutional amendment stripping same-sex couples of the right to marry. Miller was presented as an expert in American and Californian politics. The plaintiffs objected to Miller’s
qualification as an expert in the areas of discrimination against
gay
s and lesbian
s and gay and lesbian political power
, contending in particular that Miller lacks sufficient expertise to offer an opinion on the relative political power of gay men and lesbians, but did not object to his qualification as an expert on initiatives. Judge Vaughn Walker permitted Miller to testify, but in his decision filed on August 4, 2010, agreed with the plaintiffs, writing that "while Miller has significant experience with politics generally, he is not sufficiently familiar with gay and lesbian politics specifically to offer opinions on gay and lesbian political power."
During the trial, Miller testified about factors determining a group's political power, and explained why, in his opinion, these factors favor a conclusion that gays and lesbians have political power. Under cross-examination
, Miller was questioned about his knowledge of the relevant scholarship and data on which he based his opinion, and admitted that proponents’ counsel provided him with most of the "materials considered" in his expert report; on redirect
, Miller explained that he had reviewed "most"
of the materials listed in his expert report and that he "tried to review all of them." He admitted that he lacked awareness of official anti-gay discrimination and harassment, anti-discrimination statutes, and scholarly literature on gay issues.
Judge Walker found that the credibility of Miller's opinions was undermined by his lack of focus on gay and lesbian issues in his research; his lack of basis for comparison; his lack of familiarity with relevant research,; his inability to confirm that he had "personally identified the vast majority of the sources that he cited in his expert report"; and his concession that gays and lesbians face discrimination and "current discrimination is relevant to a group's political power." Additionally, Walker found that Miller's credibility was further undermined because "the opinions he offered at trial were inconsistent with the opinions he expressed before he was retained as an expert." Accordingly, the court ruled that "Miller’s opinions on gay and lesbian political power are entitled to little weight and only to the extent they are amply supported by reliable evidence.
Claremont McKenna College
Claremont McKenna College is a private, coeducational liberal arts college and a member of the Claremont Colleges located in Claremont, California. The campus is located east of Downtown Los Angeles...
. He specializes in California politics.
Miller has a BA from Pomona College, a JD from Harvard Law School
Harvard Law School
Harvard Law School is one of the professional graduate schools of Harvard University. Located in Cambridge, Massachusetts, it is the oldest continually-operating law school in the United States and is home to the largest academic law library in the world. The school is routinely ranked by the U.S...
and a Ph.D. in political science from the University of California at Berkeley.
Miller is the author of Direct Democracy and the Courts which is a work that examines how referendums should be weighed in a court of law.
Perry v. Schwarzenegger testimony
Miller was presented to the court as an expert witnessExpert witness
An expert witness, professional witness or judicial expert is a witness, who by virtue of education, training, skill, or experience, is believed to have expertise and specialised knowledge in a particular subject beyond that of the average person, sufficient that others may officially and legally...
in Perry v. Schwarzenegger
Perry v. Schwarzenegger
Perry v. Schwarzenegger is a federal lawsuit filed in the United States District Court for the Northern District of California challenging the federal constitutionality of Proposition 8, a 2008 ballot initiative that amended the California Constitution to restrict marriage to opposite-sex couples,...
by the defendant-intervenors, proponents of California Proposition 8 (2008)
California Proposition 8 (2008)
Proposition 8 was a ballot proposition and constitutional amendment passed in the November 2008 state elections...
, a constitutional amendment stripping same-sex couples of the right to marry. Miller was presented as an expert in American and Californian politics. The plaintiffs objected to Miller’s
qualification as an expert in the areas of discrimination against
gay
Gay
Gay is a word that refers to a homosexual person, especially a homosexual male. For homosexual women the specific term is "lesbian"....
s and lesbian
Lesbian
Lesbian is a term most widely used in the English language to describe sexual and romantic desire between females. The word may be used as a noun, to refer to women who identify themselves or who are characterized by others as having the primary attribute of female homosexuality, or as an...
s and gay and lesbian political power
Political power
Political power is a type of power held by a group in a society which allows administration of some or all of public resources, including labour, and wealth. There are many ways to obtain possession of such power. At the nation-state level political legitimacy for political power is held by the...
, contending in particular that Miller lacks sufficient expertise to offer an opinion on the relative political power of gay men and lesbians, but did not object to his qualification as an expert on initiatives. Judge Vaughn Walker permitted Miller to testify, but in his decision filed on August 4, 2010, agreed with the plaintiffs, writing that "while Miller has significant experience with politics generally, he is not sufficiently familiar with gay and lesbian politics specifically to offer opinions on gay and lesbian political power."
During the trial, Miller testified about factors determining a group's political power, and explained why, in his opinion, these factors favor a conclusion that gays and lesbians have political power. Under cross-examination
Cross-examination
In law, cross-examination is the interrogation of a witness called by one's opponent. It is preceded by direct examination and may be followed by a redirect .- Variations by Jurisdiction :In...
, Miller was questioned about his knowledge of the relevant scholarship and data on which he based his opinion, and admitted that proponents’ counsel provided him with most of the "materials considered" in his expert report; on redirect
Redirect
Redirect may refer to:* Redirection , a capability of command-line interpreters* Redirect examination, in law* URL redirection, techniques on the World Wide Web for making a web page available under many URLs...
, Miller explained that he had reviewed "most"
of the materials listed in his expert report and that he "tried to review all of them." He admitted that he lacked awareness of official anti-gay discrimination and harassment, anti-discrimination statutes, and scholarly literature on gay issues.
Judge Walker found that the credibility of Miller's opinions was undermined by his lack of focus on gay and lesbian issues in his research; his lack of basis for comparison; his lack of familiarity with relevant research,; his inability to confirm that he had "personally identified the vast majority of the sources that he cited in his expert report"; and his concession that gays and lesbians face discrimination and "current discrimination is relevant to a group's political power." Additionally, Walker found that Miller's credibility was further undermined because "the opinions he offered at trial were inconsistent with the opinions he expressed before he was retained as an expert." Accordingly, the court ruled that "Miller’s opinions on gay and lesbian political power are entitled to little weight and only to the extent they are amply supported by reliable evidence.