16 Comments

Wow! It’s almost as if when I said “this law is in violation of the Ohio state constitution” all those months ago, I was right! Who’d have thought! 🤦🏻‍♀️

Expand full comment

It's rather fitting that the aimless and reactionary nature of the Republican party is coming back to haunt them in this way. Who would have thought that years of conspiratorial thinking, fear-mongering, and blanket opposition to Democrats would result in the passing of blatantly contradictory laws?!

Expand full comment

The ACLU argument...just love it!!!

Expand full comment

Gender-affirming care bans, whether for minors or adults, are deeply cruel, unfair, and seem unconstitutional on multiple levels. Great move by the ACLU. It’s about time we stop this madness and return medical care to where it belongs - to patients, doctors and their families and not vote-seeking politicians. Medical care, I might add, that is endorsed by EVERY MAJOR medical organization.

Expand full comment

Thank you for your work 💗🤎

Expand full comment

LOVE IT!!! That's amazing that a republican law will hopefully overturn the new republican law as unconstitutional!!! Hahaha...made my day!!!

Expand full comment
Mar 27·edited Mar 27

The Law of Unintended Consequences strikes again! Good thing Republicans are so bad at thinking ahead... if they planned for their next culture war while still fighting the last culture war, we'd be far worse off than we are already. Instead, we get to watch them trip over a mess they left there themselves while they were busy fearmongering about a total nothingburger. 𝘎𝘰𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘯𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵 death panels? I mean, really- have they ever even dealt with an insurance company? They have entire death 𝘢𝘤𝘤𝘰𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘥𝘦𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵𝘴!

Which wingnut think tank authored that amendment in the first place, though? Feels only right to send them a heaping pile of "thank you for shooting yourself in the foot" cards.

Expand full comment

You know you're in the wrong when you have to dance a little sidestep to pass a ban on something by distracting people and focusing on some other provision inserted solely to get the ban approved.

People are always so quick to take away other people's rights and not their own.

Expand full comment

So great to hear this! Of course, all such bans are in violation of Title 9, so the appeals courts that allowed the bans to go into effect, the most activist and reactionary courts in the nation, ignored Title 9 altogether in their rulings.

Expand full comment

I’m pessimistic that this argument will hold water in court, given that conservative justices prefer conservative outcomes over application of textualist judicial philosophy. I hope I’m wrong, though!

Expand full comment

Legal aikido - channeling the opponent's momentum against them.

Expand full comment

Isn't it ironic...

Expand full comment

Clearly in violation of the state constitution.

Expand full comment
founding

I've been ridiculed and told that I'm uneducated for insisting that we need a better system. One where a law should not go into effect unless it can pass a litmus test finding it not to be in violation of our constitution. Of course there will be appeals but our current system allows any law to pass and stand until it can be struck down years and tens of thousands of dollars later. It's a two steps forward and one back proposition that results in ruined lives, unnecessary incarceration and lost savings.

Expand full comment
founding

Love it! Their own crap-laws turned against them 😂😂😂 Can’t make this sh*t up!

Expand full comment

I love it when can hoist them on their own Pitard. Go ACLU!!

Expand full comment