"(The judge) missed the big picture.... It became an argument on narrow points of the law and not on the voters' ability to function, and I think that was a mistake."

William McConkey, a plaintiff who argued that the ballot question which added a gay marriage ban to the Wisconsin constitution had not been constructed legally because it covered more than one purpose -- to restrict marriage to man-woman, and then to remove the ability of unmarried individuals to access the same rights. Dane County Circuit Judge Richard Niess ruled that the two were clearly related. (The Capital Times)