nearvideo Texas Attorney General files lawsuit warning “We will stop” California travel ban
AG Ken Paxton says The California ban punished Texas for the opportunity, faith-based foster care and adoption agencies in order to safeguard their religious beliefs.
AUSTIN – Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton sworn, “stop” California travel ban that prevents the government-funded travel to other States, as discriminatory against the LGBTQ community.
After filing a lawsuit this week, Paxton told Fox News the ban is “discriminatory” against the 11 States, the in your are included.
“We should not hurt us, because we have a different view,” Paxton, a Republican, said in an interview. “This was an important issue for us. We think it is important for the whole nation.”
TEXAS ASKS SUPREME COURT TO REPEAL THE CALIFORNIA MULTI-STATE TRAVEL BAN
California Assembly Bill 1887 is controversial, first entered into force in January 2017. Texas was later added to the state’s travel ban after the leader passed a law so that the adoption agencies to decide whether to allow or not, that a same-sex couple to adopt a child.
Paxton argues, to impose the ban amounts to a state, to make their views on others, what are the rights of the state’s right to set its own guidelines.
“From my point of view, we are not the state, is discriminatory. California is discriminatory and the reduction in the number of agencies and groups that can actually help,” said Paxton.
The attorney General argued that California “limited the opportunities for these children.” Paxton said that the reason why he feels a Federal court action is required after you on the travel-ban list for more than three years.
“I just don’t want to impose that you, your discriminatory views on us,” said Paxton. “I think the way Texas views this is the options we give to these children by participating in organizations with different views, it opens the door for us to be successful in the placement of these children.”
“If your religious views say, we will place and adopted child to a same-sex couple’s marriage or partnership, this is up to you, and if other organisations decide to you, that’s up to you”, Paxton. “California, discriminated against, and they say that religious organisations are not able to do that, and that is good for California, but now they are trying to impose the views of my condition.”
Texas is one of the 11 States affected by the California travel ban.
The state of Texas joins 10 others on the travel ban list, including Alabama, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Tennessee.
Oklahoma was to avenge the first state, against California, in the exercise of their own travel ban in January 2020. Oklahoma GOP Gov. Kevin Stitt’s executive order prohibits all “non-essential travel” to the state of California. The ban allows exceptions for the Oklahoma Department of Commerce so that the Agency continue the recruiting efforts, the “bring more job creators to the business-friendly state of Oklahoma.”
Texas was added to the list of prohibited travel-States in the year 2017, after the state passed a law so that the child can refuse welfare provider services against their religious beliefs.
In a press release, Stitt said: “California and the elected officials banned in the past few years, traveling in the state of Oklahoma, in an effort to threaten politically and intimidate Oklahomans for your personal values. Enough is enough. If California elected officials, public employees traveling in Oklahoma, I am very much looking forward to the return of the gesture in the name of the Oklahoma laws that protect and ensure the rights of an unborn child’s life.”
In the year 2018, Oklahoma has been added to the travel ban was created after a Directive, so that private fostering and adoption agencies the right to refuse placement of children with families, based in religious or moral reasons.
DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP HERE
The city of San Francisco is the latest to deliver a blow to the Sooner state, the prohibition of the city-paid trip to Oklahoma, citing laws that protect and ensure the rights of an unborn child. San Francisco-a ban that applies to every state that bans abortion before a fetus is life ability, also contains 21 other States, including Texas and eight other, the ban is already on the state trip.
San Francisco, the ban entered into force on 1 Jan.
Texas Attorney General Paxton said that the ban deprives the state of tax revenue from hotels and other companies would have made money from the trip by the Californians.
Texas is now the first state to get to try it overturned the California state ban. Paxton said that the ban also prevents that Texas state revenues from the loss of spending in local businesses.
“We are trying to protect the state of economic retaliation, it is under-supplied form, we knew to ask for it and go to stop it,” said Paxton.
The suit is one, of the University of Houston, Associate professor of law Emily Berman said, is unlike anything the Supreme court has previously seen.
“In General, if States before the court against another, it is a question of a border dispute or a dispute about who is entitled to, said the water from a certain river, but this is a new, out of the courts,” Berman. “The way that Texas views of this law is that it is a targeted attack on the religious freedom of the citizens of Texas and, in General, those types of claims come up in connection with an individual, it is usually not something that is brought by the state, and certainly not by a state against another state, have we, sot of entered new territory in many ways here.”
California Attorney General responds to the claim of Texas.
The office of California attorney General Xavier Becerra said they are “reviewing the complaint.” Becerra, a Democrat, responded to reply to a request for comment to “In California, we have chosen to use to support the money of the taxpayers, discriminatory laws against the LGBTQ community.”
Now, the first letter was submitted, California, will receive the opportunity to file his own reply brief.
“Once in California, has submitted, you to distributed this response briefs to the judges, and then they will consider whether to hear or not, is the case,” Berman said. “If the Supreme court decides to hear this case, then you will ask for briefings, he parties, and then it will be the oral arguments in the way that we traditionally used in Supreme Court cases, and then we will wait and see what the court has to say.”
Paxton, said it is unclear when and if the Supreme court about the lawsuit, although he did warn that the dispute could take years.