Judge David Lampe's controversial ruling favoring discrimination in the contested arena of cake-baking reveals a very unsavory influence. If Judge Lampe doesn't rule in support of community values on a hot-button issue, it's more than likely he would be unseated in the next election.

Any first-year law student can cite legal precedent which is at odds with Lampe's ruling. I'm sure Lampe can, too, but it's questionable if these precedents were weighed on the scales of justice. Court decision issued by judges are subjective. It is not disputed that Lampe ran unopposed for the bench in 2016, and undeniably wants to continue to hold his job.

Lampe will fervently deny this, but who would fail to acknowledge that if he sided against conservatives and Christians and in favor of lesbians, his future on the bench would be in jeopardy? The Christian community would rally to unseat him — rallying with God at their backs. Lampe knows his ruling will be overturned and is hoping his ruling won't result in a review by the State Judicial Review Board, an oversight board with the power to censor and reprimand.

Bakersfield is an island of conservatism in a sea of progressivism. We are at least 50 years behind what the rest of Californians and California's courts deem acceptable, conventional and just. It should not be lost on anyone that Judicial Court District 9 has both stood up and defied President Trump successfully on several issues relying on constitutional principles.

There is no doubt that Lampe's decision will be tossed out by the higher courts. The Supreme Court will issue a ruling on Tastries later this year, which will finally bring an end to this debate.

— Wade Eagleton, Bakersfield