California Bans Travel To Another State Based On Its 'Discriminatory' LGBT Adoption Law

[appalachiablue]

Source: USA Today

Add Oklahoma to the list of states to which California is banning state-funded and state-sponsored travel.
California Attorney General Xavier Becerra announced Friday that as a result of "discriminatory legislation" that became Oklahoma law last month, the western state will prohibit travel to its midwestern counterpart.

A 2017 California law requires that its attorney general keeps a list of states subject to a state travel ban because of "laws that authorize or require discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression," Becerra's office said in a statement.
"California taxpayers are taking a stand against bigotry and in support of those who would be harmed by this prejudiced policy." he said.

Oklahoma becomes the ninth state subject to the state-funded ban. Travel to Alabama, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee and Texas had previously been prohibited due to the 2017 law.
More: Citing LGBT discrimination, California bans state travel to Kentucky and three other states

In May, Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin signed a bill that allows private adoption agencies to deny same-sex couples from their adoption services on the basis of "religious or moral convictions or policies." The bill sparked backlash from LGBTQ advocates...More..

Read more: https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/california-bans-travel-to-another-state-based-on-its-discriminatory-lgbt-adoption-law/ar-AAy9dPn?li=BBnb7Kz

---

- California Attorney General Xavier Becerra

[kimbutgar]

1. Not one California tax payer money in a red state

I’m ok with tbat. These states are keeping us from advancing into the future.

[appalachiablue]

2. The ban is understandable, a principled stance against bigotry & discrimination.

[Initech]

3. Thanks Christian conservatives!

[The Wielding Truth]

4. Why would Cali have "state-funded and state-sponsored travel" anyway. Why would they pay to go to

any state?

[greymattermom]

5. There are professional organizations of state

governors, legal folks, teachers, you name it. People get together to share what worked and didn't in their states.

[greymattermom]

6. Professors at state universities

travel to conferences. When I was a professor at a red state, there were specific rules for travel on state funds.

[The Wielding Truth]

8. That seems like a perk and should be used in a decriminary manner. I think it is reasonable to

make trips, paid for by state funds, follow reasonable guidelines.

[Quemado]

7. Would the travel ban apply to athletic teams?

Example: UCLA, a state-funded university, wants to send their women's softball team to the Women's College World Series, which is played in Oklahoma City every year (I believe). Would that travel be banned?

[Jedi Guy]

10. I'd imagine athletic competitions are exempt.

For one, athletic competitions (and especially tournament victories) elevate the university's standing and, more importantly, bring in lots of money. Schools make tons of money on athletics, particularly since they don't pay their athletes. So from a purely practical standpoint, you want your universities to be able to compete and win on a national stage.

For another, keeping student athletes from competing because of a law they had nothing to do with (and probably don't agree with anyway) is very unfair to them. Whether they love the game or hope to go pro, student athletes shouldn't be barred from competing because of a bass-ackwards law in another state. Doing otherwise is punishing the innocent, in my view.

The second bit, of course, is just my opinion. I imagine the universities care less about the latter and more about the former.

[Crash2Parties]

13. Yes; no different from academic conferences

In both cases - but especially athletics - the schools have said that they have other funding they are using.

[MichMan]

16. So much for principle

Can't do anything to athletics that might hurt revenues

How many conferences etc. are usually held in Oklahoma anyway?

[a la izquierda]

20. Probably a few academic conferences a year.

I have colleagues from California that are hamstrung when big academic conferences are held in these kinds of places. But they support it and so do I. I went to grad school in Oklahoma but I only go back to visit if it's really, really important. I don't want to spend money there.

[riversedge]

9. Wish all Blue states would do the same! 🌊🌊🌊 #FlipItBlue #BlueWave2018 #VoteThemOUT #TrumpCorrup

[Cold War Spook]

11. Totally against this.

This is The United States of America. What would be the next move against the Constitution? Tariffs between states?

[Retrograde]

12. Californians can travel anywhere they want

on their own dime. The ban applies only to travel funded by the state, i.e., with taxpayer money.

[Crash2Parties]

14. How, exactly, is this a move "against the Constitution" please?

For your convenience, here's the text of the travel ban law itself:
https://oag.ca.gov/ab1887

Please point out the parts that violate the Federal Constitution, I'm sure the California Legislature & Attorney General could use your legal expertise.

[Cold War Spook]

15. I am not a lawyer,

but if the state does not send an employee to a banned state and in doing so the residents of their state lose benefits that they can only get from one of those banned states. Our states are too interwoven to start this. If this is allowed what will states be allowed to ban travel by employees for any reason they want.

[FUGAMC]

17. You are just wrong.

A ban on private travel would be unconstitutional. The State can ban official State travel without violating the Constitution. This is nothing new. https://www.hrc.org/blog/new-york-governor-cuomo-reaffirms-ban-on-official-travel-to-north-carolina; http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/new-york-state-workers-banned-visiting-mississippi-article-1.2589757

I’d be happy if all the blues states banned official travel to Dumbfuckistan.

[rockfordfile]

18. Go tell Oklahoma to stop being un-American

[Crash2Parties]

19. They aren't banning travel; residents (and non-res) are still free to travel to any state they wish.

The state however is not willing to pay for state employees, on official state business, to travel to states that discriminate. Our government is making a choice that our employees won't go to those states for those functions *on the state's dime*.