Suing on behalf of Jesus… yup, that would prolly work here.
Also, this gives other states the go-ahead to make similarly structured laws to abbreviate constitutional rights, as long as it’s laws against things that the GOP doesn’t like.
Somebody ought to teach that motherfucker about the Supremacy Clause, which gives the federal government the power to protect people from having their rights jeopardized by state overreach.
Can’t penalize a business for enforcing its own standards for hiring and retaining employees. It would be a lot easier on the Texas Treasury if he DIDN’T insist on testing that assertion in court.
Its all going to be moot anyway since its pretty clear that SCOTUS is going to kill Roe v. Wade sometime this summer anyway. All these court battles really do is have the abortion ban go into effect a few months earlier in Texas than it will in all of the other Red states, which is kind of the point.
There’s been a lot of chatter about structuring laws against guns this way. After all, the whole point was to get around the constitutional “right to privacy”.
That’s honestly less damaging than this “you can’t defend your rights” law.
Or similar vigilante laws allowing suits against demonstrators outside of clinics performing abortions.
But I’m not fond of this kind of fighting fire with fire. To extend the metaphor, I’m afraid our current Supreme Court figured they could get away with the first act of arson, but we’re not going to be able to put the fire out before the house burns down.
If I were a cynical man (and I am), once SCOTUS strikes down Roe they’ll look at the Texas vigilante law and declare it unconstitutional (and moot, due to the Roe thing, but will defang other attempts to do the same thing for rights they do support).
Ah, the ol’ “binds but does not protect some, protects but does not bind others” meme again.
Well, I hope they declare it unconstitutional. I think it’s a lot more dangerous than killing Roe v. Wade, honestly.
I agree - I just think folks who are looking at that potential silver lining for their causes are going to be disappointed.
School districts in Texas are now required to teach students about dating violence, family violence, child abuse and sex trafficking after a new law went into effect in early December.
…
In June, Gov. Greg Abbott vetoed the original version of the bill over concerns that it didn’t allow parental involvement. During the second special session, legislators passed a revamped version of the law that included Abbott’s input.
Parents are now required to sign a permission slip for their students to be educated on these subjects, raising concerns that children who may be experiencing abuse at the hands of a parent will be excluded from receiving information that could help them.
…
The law, known as the “Christine Blubaugh Act”, is named after a 16-year-old who was killed by her ex-boyfriend in Grand Prairie, Texas in 2000. The original legislation, which didn’t require parental permission, had bipartisan support and passed the Senate on a 29-2 vote. The bill’s sponsors said they were shocked when the governor vetoed it.
…
[Roy Rios, prevention manager for the Texas Council on Family Violence] hopes the new law will give every student access to this education. But he and other advocates worry that requiring parents to sign up will diminish the reach.
A man’s [sic] home is his castle and no gummint can mess with it, by damn.
…and apparently, his children, especially those of the daughter persuasion, are among his chattels and holdings. 
Texas passes a decent law that you’d expect to be non controversial with bipartisan support, then Abbot fucks it up.
He vetoed a bill that would have created criminal penalties for tethering a dog outside in the Texas heat without access to water or adequate shelter. Said it was “micro-managing and over-criminalization.” Only after he got hammered by everyone on the political spectrum did he add it back in a special session and let it pass.
Abbott has a history of springing his vetoes by surprise, never having raised any concerns while the bill was considered in the Legislature. Pisses the members off but what are they gonna do about it?
I thought he was just an asinine troll against the Democrats, but he’s a bipartisan troll. How the fuck did he get elected?!
In my court, I would expect Baby Jebus Himself to appear in court and testify under oath that He was offended. Otherwise that defense can’t be used.
Too bad he can’t be subjected to that kind of treatment.
How do you think he’d hold up on cross ?
Depends on how well the lawyer nails him.