Isn't it odd calling this form of law Texas-inspired, when Texas got the idea from states working to legalize drugs?
Stopping the war on drugs sounds grrat, but it also sounds like the reporting here is biased.
Stopping the war on drugs sounds grrat, but it also sounds like the reporting here is biased.
To an extent there's a link, both acts are about bodily autonomy and personal choice, but one is a right and the other a crime, federally. Allowing any random person to sue for cash for the thing that is allowed vs regulating and taxing the sale of forbidden substances seem wildly different.
A big focus of the Supreme Court arguments was that if the Texas law was allowed to stand, then any constitutional right, especially gun rights that are near and dear to conservatives, could be ignored in this manner, and that was the line of argument that appeared to have the biggest impact on more conservative judges like Kavanagh.
CA doing this is basically a warning to SCOTUS justices that if they allow the Texas law to stand, it's game on.
I think California may face a more difficult argument since 2nd Amendment rights are in the Constitution, but Roe v. Wade is just court precedent.
That said, it depends on how the law they propose to inact will work. The right to own a firearm is not the same as the right to manufacture or sell a firearm. They might drive firearm manufacturing and sales out of state, but not be able to prohibit someone buying a firearm out of state and bringing it home.
That's a distinction without justification. Constitutional rights are basically however the Supreme Court interprets them.
With respect to gun rights, there has been a long debate over whether the 2nd amendment applies to any individual, or just to "a well-regulated militia". The only reason it applies to any individual is because that's how the court interpreted it (and more recently than Roe v Wade) - through "court precedent", as you say.
Good point.
That distinction is more artificial than I perceived it.
Fine reasoning, except it's already open. SCOTUS allowed the law to stand. Any barrier to laws of that type will have to come from the US Congress or the state legislatures.
They declined to issue an injunction to block the law until the case is decided. They have not yet ruled on the merits of the issue.