The People’s Republic of California — the land where not only do wishes come true but it’s the law that they do so, and doubters had better watch their mouths — has caught the attention of worried sports fans for a recently enacted law that may hamper college teams’ ability to travel and compete in less Progressive states.
The benighted states in question include North Carolina, Kansas, Tennessee and Mississippi, and may soon be joined by Texas and others.
The sin for which they have been indicted under Assembly Bill 1887, which took effect this year, is the villainous crime of not requiring their citizens to get in line with the homosexual/transgender agenda.
The actual text in part states:
“A state agency, department, board, authority, or commission, including an agency, department, board, authority, or commission of the University of California, the Board of Regents of the University of California, or the California State University, and the Legislature shall not do either of the following:“… Approve a request for state-funded or state-sponsored travel to a state that, after June 26, 2015, has enacted a law that voids or repeals, or has the effect of voiding or repealing, existing state or local protections against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression, or has enacted a law that authorizes or requires discrimination against same-sex couples or their families or on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression, including any law that creates an exemption to antidiscrimination laws in order to permit discrimination against same-sex couples or their families or on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression.”
In previous, less enlightened years, college sports teams could travel out of state and be reimbursed for their expenses.
But as California goes, so goes the nation, and one of the reasons that is so is that California legislators are among the biggest bullies to be found in any political system. The state is adept at using its wealth and influence to bend the rest of the country to its will.
In this case, they will start by going after students’ pocketbooks. The new law applies also to any employee of a California college or university who may travel out of state on business.
The notion is that by somehow hindering participation in certain out of state events, it may somehow force the states sponsoring those events to believe that a man in a dress is a woman, two men or two women is a marriage, homosexuality is normal, etc., as California requires its own residents to affirm.
It shouldn’t be shocking that the liberals’ plan will only hurt student athletes or certain state college employees. The value of “making a statement” is always more important than any actual accomplishment in these sorts of leftish exercises.
UC Berkeley’s men’s basketball team has already canceled plans to go to Kansas, which has earned its spot on the blacklist by passing Senate Bill 175, which prevents educational institutions from punishing religious student associations that don’t comply with policies that go against “sincerely held religious beliefs.”
Kansas also has passed House Bill 2453, which prevents the state from requiring religious institutions to “treat any marriage, domestic partnership, civil union or similar arrangement as valid” if it violates the group’s beliefs.
Got that? UC Berkeley, home of the Free Speech Movement, in the most liberal state in the union, will not have its student athletes travel to Kansas because Kansas protects freedom of religion.
You can certainly expect the state to expand this fiscal-punitive approach to making everybody outside California do what it says. We are talking about the land that practically invented the hissy-fit, after all.
More important than what this immoral, misguided law does to student athletics (sorry, sports fans) is what it may do to academia, trade and business. While there are certain exceptions built into the law, what happens if an academic’s research or advancement in his field requires travel to one of the shunned states? If a scholar needs to attend a convention to keep up on the latest developments in his field, but the convention is in California’s blackout zone, under the law, that’s just a tough break.
Don’t expect the law to remain confined to academia. The long, nonsensical legislative history of California suggests a virtual certainty that similar restrictions will soon apply to any business with a state contract, any city that receives state grant money and eventually to any business inspected or governed by any state agency.
If legislators get a particular knot in their panties, a ban on particular products from particular states could be likely, as well. Even if they’re unconstitutional, they can be effective. Consider the case of the great foie gras ban, fought tooth and nail for more than a decade by the state’s gourmands. It was passed in 2004, delayed until 2012, then only overturned in 2015, and is currently on appeal. There was a day when virtually every grocer worthy of the title carried goose-liver pate. But since 2004, despite the legal challenges that have prevented enforcement, it’s a long search to find any.
California’s hubris knows no limits. The state proves time and time again that the true definition of government is other people who think they own you.