Oh Hey Looky Here, It's UNITED STATES VS GODDAMN TEXAS

[Nevilledog]

Link to tweet

https://www.wonkette.com/us-v-texas


Remember last week, when Texas and the federal court system took a shit all over women's rights and then flushed them both down the toilet? And the government did basically nothing but issue angry press releases?

Well, looks like my government is finally doing something about it!

Yesterday, the DOJ sued Texas to stop enforcement SB 8, which bans basically all abortions by, as the DOJ puts it, "deputiz[ing] private citizens ... to serve as bounty hunters."

Correctly pointing out that "Texas enacted S.B. 8 in open defiance of the Constitution[,]" the United States asks a federal court to find that the law is unconstitutional under the Fourteenth Amendment's Supremacy Clause, preempted by federal law, and a violation of intergovernmental immunity. The DOJ is seeking a declaratory judgment that the law is some illegal bullshit (paraphrasing), and for it to be enjoined.

As the lawsuit lays out,

It takes little imagination to discern Texas's goal—to make it too risky for an abortion clinic to operate in the State, thereby preventing women throughout Texas from exercising their constitutional rights, while simultaneously thwarting judicial review. Thus far, the law has had its desired effect. To date, abortion providers have ceased providing services prohibited by S.B. 8, leaving women in Texas unacceptably and unconstitutionally deprived of abortion services. Yet, despite this flagrant deprivation of rights, S.B. 8 remains in effect.

And FUCK THAT.

*snip*

[CaliforniaPeggy]

1. FUCK THAT is right. Damn right. How dare they upend our Constitution? Heads must roll. n/t

[dalton99a]

2. The lawsuit is worth a read

...

https://storage.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.txwd.1146510/gov.uscourts.txwd.1146510.1.0_10.pdf

[regnaD kciN]

3. One legal expert on MSNBC...

...said that he thought the case would be sufficient to prevail in the lower courts but, inevitably, this will wind up before SCOTUS, and all bets are off there.

[lame54]

4. A week is finally?

[Hugin]

5. So, the Fourteenth Amendment...

And if Texass should prevail. Will the United States of America proceed to cease providing any revenue or commerce with the rogue State? Even before? It would seem silly to give money to someone who you're suing.

Asking for a friend and fellow US Citizen.

[Ms. Toad]

6. Pretty much what I said -

based on prior litigation to enforce racially restrictive covenants:

That constitutional rights apply in court enforcement of judgments isn't even novel. In defamation and libel lawsuits, the First Amendment applies, even though the plaintiffs aren't state actors. You know why? Because courts, which would enforce any judgment, are state actors. In the same vein, courts can't enforce racist covenants. And why is that? Because courts are state actors.

The DOJ alludes to this in the complaint, noting that "Texas has mandated that its state judicial officers enforce this unconstitutional attack by requiring them to dispense remedies that undeniably burden constitutionally protected rights."