General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsJudge strikes down California gun law modeled on Texas abortion measure
Politico via Yahoo NewsThe injunction from Judge Roger Benitez sets Californias law, which enables private citizens to sue manufacturers of illegal guns, on a potential path to the U.S. Supreme Court. That could set up a test of both laws an outcome that California Gov. Gavin Newsom has sought.
I want to thank Judge Benitez. We have been saying all along that Texas anti-abortion law is outrageous. Judge Benitez just confirmed it is also unconstitutional," Newsom said in a statement Monday. "The provision in Californias law that he struck down is a replica of what Texas did, and his explanation of why this part of SB 1327 unfairly blocks access to the courts applies equally to Texas SB 8."
Benitez also underscored the ties between the two laws in his ruling, citing Newsoms condemnations of the Texas measure that deputizes citizens to sue abortion providers as evidence that the California gun law is unconstitutional.
"'It is cynical.' 'It is an abomination.' 'It is outrageous and objectionable.' 'There is no dispute that it raises serious constitutional questions,'" Benitez wrote at the start of his ruling, quoting Newsom on the Texas law as evidence that "by implication," the same is true of California's law.
Hugh_Lebowski
(33,643 posts)Especially when you add this to it "Benitez also underscored the ties between the two laws in his ruling, citing Newsoms condemnations of the Texas measure"
It's really not that good of a look. Benitez isn't like a CA State Senator, he's supposed to be impartial/non-political. The two come off looking like a team here.
I like the guy, but he sometimes does some things I feel are really not well thought-through.
SunSeeker
(51,726 posts)Particularly a well-reasoned ruling, as this one was.
It doesn't imply the judge was corrupt or worked "as a team" with the litigant.
What is wrong with showcasing how unconstitutional the Texas vigilante law is?
Plus this helps establish a conflict of rulings on such laws in the circuit courts, one of the key grounds the Supreme Court uses to take up a case. Maybe this will lead SCOTUS to reconsider their opinion allowing the Texas vigilante law, which effectively invites other States to refine S. B. 8′s model for nullifying federal rights, Sotomayor warned in her dissent. https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2021/12/10/supreme-court-rules-on-texas-6-week-abortion-ban/
Newsom is proving Sotomayor's point. Newsom's litigation seems quite "well thought through."
Hugh_Lebowski
(33,643 posts)Zeitghost
(3,871 posts)Benitez is a well know pro-gun judge that regularly strikes down CA gun control measures. He and Newsom are hardly a team.
Hugh_Lebowski
(33,643 posts)MichMan
(11,977 posts)Now that the SC has ruled that states can enact abortion restrictions, it would seem that Texas could just do that directly now.
BWdem4life
(1,699 posts)Not much better, though.
SunSeeker
(51,726 posts)Because SCOTUS allowed the outsourcing enforcement scheme to persist, it effectively invites other States to refine S. B. 8′s model for nullifying federal rights, Sotomayor warned in her dissent. https://www.dallasnews.com/news/politics/2021/12/10/supreme-court-rules-on-texas-6-week-abortion-ban/
Newsom is trying to show SCOTUS how true Sotomayor's warning was, and hopefully cause them to reconsider their ruling.
republianmushroom
(13,703 posts)ripcord
(5,537 posts)He said he has spoken quite a bit about the Texas law being unconstitutional and he wasn't going to defend a similar law he also thought was unconstitutional.