Discussion
  • Read More
    weebleswobbleJoanna Rothkopf
    5/19/16 1:47pm

    Medical licenses are granted by state licensing boards — how can the state government strip that?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      SideEye3weebleswobble
      5/19/16 1:53pm

      Another excellent question I can’t answer. Jfc.

      Vote, everyone. In EVERY election.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      j4x_weebleswobble
      5/19/16 2:12pm

      Because small government

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    GELLA - LLAPJoanna Rothkopf
    5/19/16 1:41pm
    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      tonyinabagGELLA - LLAP
      5/19/16 2:13pm

      Me too. and I live here. :( (OK i mean)

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    lethekkJoanna Rothkopf
    5/19/16 1:44pm

    As a non-US citizen, I have to ask how is it possible for states to pass laws that are unconstitutional?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      I'm Fart and I'm Smunnylethekk
      5/19/16 1:46pm

      As a US citizen, I have no fucking clue.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      beep beep i'm a jeeplethekk
      5/19/16 1:50pm

      Unconstitutionality isn’t always proactive. It’s very frequently reactive: One has to legally prove guilt, one has to legally prove it is not unconstitutional.

      Depending on the situation, the existence of a legal challenge may prevent its implementation, but not always. Since the constitution doesn’t literally say they can’t do it, but through a few proofs you get to the same result, the bill probably has to go through the whole court process if it doesn’t get executive-veto’d.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    YouTellMeJoanna Rothkopf
    5/19/16 1:38pm

    What the Hell is it like a full moon and the GOP are on a rampage today?

    Was just reading about this:

    Chaos in House after GOP votes down LGBT measure

    “The House floor devolved into chaos and shouting on Thursday as a measure to ensure protections for members of the LGBT community narrowly failed to pass after Republican leaders urged their members to change their votes.

    Initially, it appeared Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney’s (D-N.Y.) amendment had enough votes to pass as “yes” votes piled up to 217 against 206 “no” votes.

    But it eventually failed on a 212-213 vote after a number of Republican lawmakers changed their votes from “yes” to “no.”

    GOP leaders held the vote open as they pressured members to change sides.

    “Shame! Shame! Shame!” Democrats chanted as they watched the vote tally go from passage of Maloney’s amendment to narrow failure.”

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Akat101YouTellMe
      5/19/16 1:56pm
      GIF

      Think I’m gonna quit my job and just start following these assholes around with a bell.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      YouTellMeAkat101
      5/19/16 2:55pm

      I am so fucking down.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    ILikeThunderstormsJoanna Rothkopf
    5/19/16 2:08pm

    Interested to hear any legal jezzies’ perspectives: what could they hope to accomplish here? Since the law is clearly unconstitutional, any judge worth their salt would strike it down in a suit, and I’m sure PP or some other organization will file a suit immediately if it is signed into law. Are they hoping that it would go to the Supreme Court eventually and that, if Trump is elected (shudder and death rattle...okay I’m back), he would appoint a conservative judge who would help use this law to effectively overturn Roe v. Wade?

    Or do they have no strategy and just voting based on misogyny and forced-birther-ness and have no qualms in wasting taxpayer time and money in a hopefully fruitless attempt to deny women healthcare and reproductive choice?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      iElvis is Now Funded by Peter ThielILikeThunderstorms
      5/19/16 2:11pm

      Are they hoping that it would go to the Supreme Court eventually and that, if Trump is elected (shudder and death rattle...okay I’m back), he would appoint a conservative judge who would help use this law to effectively overturn Roe v. Wade?

      That is exactly the intent.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Fancia PantalonesILikeThunderstorms
      5/19/16 5:14pm

      Mostly the former. But also, Oklahoma is the home of prosperity Christianity, the belief that God will materially reward you if you are righteous. And we’re going through a hard time here financially. The bottom has fallen out of the energy industry and the state government has run out of money for stuff like education and healthcare. So folks like the sponsors of this bill believe that by passing “righteous” legislation, God will reward Oklahoma and fix our economy. Personally, I think developing alternative industry and reversing our regressive tax cuts would be a better plan.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    MisteryCatJoanna Rothkopf
    5/19/16 2:12pm

    This law will immediately be challenged - and an injunction issued pending appeal. It will never go into effect.

    Now, you might wonder why Oklahoma small-government conservatives are ok with their politicians wasting resources on such a law, but that is a mystery for the ages that my meager law degree cannot answer.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Bono's BonerJoanna Rothkopf
      5/19/16 1:39pm

      Please tell me again how the Democratic Party is no different from the GOP?

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        j4x_Bono's Boner
        5/19/16 2:16pm

        Because I’m a child with no concept of consequnces?

        Reply
        <
    • Read More
      Mike Pipper Super GIF EnthusiastJoanna Rothkopf
      5/19/16 1:59pm

      Don’t be insane, Mary.

      VETO THAT FUCKER.

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        Mrs. MischievousMike Pipper Super GIF Enthusiast
        5/19/16 2:46pm

        Speaking as an Oklahoman... She is insane. I hope I’m wrong, but I don’t see her vetoing this.

        Reply
        <
      • Read More
        Mrs. MischievousMike Pipper Super GIF Enthusiast
        5/20/16 5:54pm

        Looks like she did it! I’ve never been so happy to be wrong!

        Reply
        <
    • Read More
      Baba Yaga Bony LegsJoanna Rothkopf
      5/19/16 1:42pm

      I don't get it...this is blatantly unconstitutional, right? If Roe v. Wade is the law of the land, how can they do something as barefaced as this?

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        OMG!PONIES!Baba Yaga Bony Legs
        5/19/16 1:46pm

        Laws are constitutional until they are deemed unconstitutional. If no one challenges this law, it will remain good and valid and in force.

        Reply
        <
      • Read More
        TheLostShameofCharlieSheenBaba Yaga Bony Legs
        5/19/16 1:53pm

        They want it to be challenged in front of the Supreme Court. One of the guys who sponsored the bill said that.

        Reply
        <
    • Read More
      JujyMonkey: Clever tagline goes hereJoanna Rothkopf
      5/19/16 1:48pm

      Rogers & Hammerstein need to change the lyrics to “Oaklahomaaaaaaa........NOT O.K.”

      Reply
      <