Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gavin Newsom says he'll use Texas abortion law as model for gun-control measure.
Fox News ^ | 12.13.2021 | Brie Stimson

Posted on 12/12/2021 3:23:36 AM PST by Carriage Hill

In responding to the U.S. Supreme Court decision allowing the Texas abortion ban to stay in place, California Gov. Gavin Newsom on Saturday said he plans to propose a gun control law that would be modeled on the Texas one. Newsom said the Supreme Court’s decision has set a precedent that will allow states to avoid federal courts when enacting laws.

(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...


TOPICS: Breaking News; Constitution/Conservatism; Culture/Society; Government; US: California; US: Texas
KEYWORDS: abortion; aspredicted; banglist; bs; california; gavinnewsom; guncontrol; laws; plannedparenthood; righttolife; scotus; texas
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-154 next last
To: DoodleDawg

Where are you *right*?

I still believe that you are here to troll Free Republic.

However, you made a very broad assertion. So, lay out your case. Support it.


21 posted on 12/12/2021 4:21:28 AM PST by Lazamataz (I feel like it is 1937 Germany, and my last name is Feinberg.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: carriage_hill
"Newsom said the Supreme Court’s decision has set a precedent that will allow states to avoid federal courts when enacting laws."

What a moron. So, little Gavin, which other Amendment's rights will you limit or modify based on this reasoning?

22 posted on 12/12/2021 4:25:09 AM PST by Enterprise
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CAluvdubya
"Newsome will eventually lose."

... in a just and fair country. Let me know when you find one.

23 posted on 12/12/2021 4:32:26 AM PST by CatOwner (Don't expect anyone, even conservatives, to have your back when the SHTF in 2021 and beyond.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz
However, you made a very broad assertion. So, lay out your case. Support it.

The Constitution protects us from the government, not us from other people. The beauty of the Texas law is that it isn't government who is restricting abortion but the fear of civil suits from people not connected with the government. Abortion providers stop providing abortions because they are afraid of being sued, and there is nothing unconstitutional in that. The Supreme Court is having a problem finding the grounds to strike the law down for those reasons.

So if you didn't think that the Blue states weren't watching and won't use the same tactics to their own benefit then you're blind. It isn't California that will be limiting gun ownership, it will be the fear of civil suits. The Newsom law will be the first. Other states may follow. Or states like New York might pass a law, for example, saying harassment against one woman is harassment against all and open Trump up for thousands of lawsuits. The possibilities are endless.

So now the ball is back in your court. You can continue with the name calling...or you can tell me where I'm wrong.

24 posted on 12/12/2021 4:37:44 AM PST by DoodleDawg
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: carriage_hill

Stunning that Gavin uses such a comparison....both can bring death.


25 posted on 12/12/2021 4:39:38 AM PST by caww ( )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: carriage_hill

So he succeeds in disarming his state’s citizens....what’s all those rich people in LA gonna do now? Open game for the new wave of home attackers. Utter carnage would follow.


26 posted on 12/12/2021 4:40:28 AM PST by Gaffer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: carriage_hill

Duh, abortion is not guaranteed in the Constitution.

Big difference!


27 posted on 12/12/2021 4:43:28 AM PST by tired&retired (Blessings )
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DoodleDawg
The Constitution protects us from the government, not us from other people. The beauty of the Texas law is that it isn't government who is restricting abortion but the fear of civil suits from people not connected with the government. Abortion providers stop providing abortions because they are afraid of being sued, and there is nothing unconstitutional in that. The Supreme Court is having a problem finding the grounds to strike the law down for those reasons.

And the Supreme Court is absolutely right.

However, Gavin Newsome (and you, by implication) attempt to conflate it to the issue of firearms rights.

The left has already attempted, numerous times and since the 1980's, to sue manufacturers of firearms and ammunition into oblivion. None of the lawsuits were successful, and it became such a nuisance that explicit laws were written to prevent such lawsuits.

As to your assertion that this tactic will be used in other leftist causes.... fine. Not seeing how it changes the playing field at all. This is the present state of affairs anyways, anyone may sue about anything. I am very much for the adoption of 'Loser Pays' legislation about civil lawsuits, which would greatly lessen the nuisance lawsuits out there.

Both Newsome and you have only restated the current state of legal affairs, providing no evidence of new vulnerabilities or legal tactics whatsoever.

In the case of Newsome, he is merely counting on the low-intelligence-level of Californians to not realize that his comments are meaningless. In your case, however, you cannot rely on the low-intelligence-level of Freepers in your attempt to troll us. :^)

28 posted on 12/12/2021 4:47:44 AM PST by Lazamataz (I feel like it is 1937 Germany, and my last name is Feinberg.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: carriage_hill

It wont, which is exactly why the supreme court kicked the Texas case back to the lower courts on an 8 to 1 ruling. The Supreme Court will use the Georgia case to overturn Roe and render the Texas law moot.


29 posted on 12/12/2021 4:51:51 AM PST by TexasFreeper2009
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bayard

Bingo...Constitutional law doesn’t seem to be Gavey’s strong point.


30 posted on 12/12/2021 4:53:57 AM PST by major_gaff (University of Parris Island, Class of '84)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: major_gaff; DoodleDawg
Bingo...Constitutional law doesn’t seem to be Gavey’s strong point.

Also: If the Supreme Court decision over the Texas law was, indeed, as described by DoodleTroll*, then the SCOTUS had little choice but to rule as they did; further, this avenue of attack on firearms rights has been active since the 1980s with little to no effect.

So Newsome is working his jaw and flapping his vocal cords without purpose.

* I admit I have not followed the SCOTUS case about the Texas abortion law, and am assuming the case and resolution is as DoodleTroll described it.

31 posted on 12/12/2021 5:00:12 AM PST by Lazamataz (I feel like it is 1937 Germany, and my last name is Feinberg.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: carriage_hill

@GavinNewsom
Gavin, Gavin, Gavin - shit-cakes vs. fresh baked brownies. Nothing in the Constitution about it being OK to murder babies for convenience - but the Constitution bars anyone from infringing on our natural rights of LIFE, Liberty, etc.

10th Amendment pertains to Texas but no State can override the Constitution and infringe on our actual rights.


32 posted on 12/12/2021 5:05:19 AM PST by trebb (Fight like your life and future depends on it - because they do.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: carriage_hill

And your police will be pointing a finger at criminals and yelling “BANG!“


33 posted on 12/12/2021 5:10:42 AM PST by Lockbox (politicians, they all seemed like game show hosts to me.... Sting)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: carriage_hill

Abortion is not an ENUMERATED CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT, Gavin. Keep And Bear Arms is.


34 posted on 12/12/2021 5:13:12 AM PST by Yo-Yo (is the /sarc tag really necessary?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz; DoodleDawg
Dawg makes a valid point.

Texas did not outlaw abortions. Texas created a state right to sue abortion providers after a fetus develops a heartbeat.

If Newsom makes no attempt to outlaw guns, and just grants state residents the right to sue gun and ammo makers whenever an innocent person is harmed by certain guns, that sounds very similar to the Texas law.

35 posted on 12/12/2021 5:18:36 AM PST by zeestephen
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: carriage_hill

Like Rush Limbaugh (we are not worthy) said: Abortion is the Left’s sacrifice.


36 posted on 12/12/2021 5:21:44 AM PST by VRW Conspirator (Socialism should more accurately be called Sociopathism)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz

Laz,

Loser pays would be a disaster for justice. Loser pays just means deeper pockets wins.


37 posted on 12/12/2021 5:22:43 AM PST by Jagermonster ("God is love, and he who abides in love abides in God, and God in him." 1 John 4:16, NKJV.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: zeestephen
... and I addressed (and rebutted) his point in post 28.
38 posted on 12/12/2021 5:23:51 AM PST by Lazamataz (I feel like it is 1937 Germany, and my last name is Feinberg.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]

To: Jagermonster
Loser pays would be a disaster for justice. Loser pays just means deeper pockets wins.

Perhaps, but I would ask, how so? How would it be a disaster?

It certainly would lessen the quantity of nuisance lawsuits.

39 posted on 12/12/2021 5:24:53 AM PST by Lazamataz (I feel like it is 1937 Germany, and my last name is Feinberg.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Lazamataz; DoodleDawg
...this avenue of attack on firearms rights has been active since the 1980s with little to no effect.

There's going to be a new twist.

If they parallel the TX law CA will make it illegal to sell handguns, say. But the state won't enforce the ban, they'll say any individual can sue a seller in civil court and if they win the suit they'll get $50k.

That's the new twist TX is using, and so far it's worked since it isn't the state enforcing the law.

I think the tactic will ultimately fail because in the long run SCOTUS won't let Constitutional rights be skirted like this, but for now Doodle's right. If it works against abortion legally it can work against any right.

40 posted on 12/12/2021 5:25:32 AM PST by semimojo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 141-154 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson