Representative Ronald Kresha is the author of an unconstitutional 2017 law that made it illegal for Minnesota businesses and individuals that have contracts with the State of Minnesota while boycotting Israel or companies that do business with Israel. Not only is the law anti-business but it’s a violation of the 1st Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Add that to the fact that it added another government regulation for businesses to deal with and Kresha’s law was just dumb. But Rep. Kresha was just following orders from his party’s national leadership. The same law that he wrote and helped pass in Minnesota was passed in states like Kansas and Arizona. It seems that so-called conservatives in those states were just as willing to be anti-business and anti-1st Amendment as Rep. Kresha.
Rep. Kresha, and legislators in those states, were warned their legislation was unconstitutional but they barged ahead any way. Now, in September, a federal judge in Phoenix Arizona ruled that the Arizona law is unconstitutional and a violation of the First Amendment. The Minnesota and Kansas laws will be next. Rep. Kresha was just wasting his time, and our tax dollars, in St. Paul by passing pointless and unconstitutional legislation.
Here's what Judge Diane Humetewa wrote in her ruling that says Arizona can't enforce the anti-boycott law:
“The First Amendment protects political association as well as political expression,” Humetewa wrote.
Judge Diand J. Humetewa (Wikipedia) |
“At the heart of the First Amendment lies the principle that each person should decide for himself or herself the ideas and beliefs deserving of expression, consideration, and adherence,” the judge wrote, quoting prior U.S. Supreme Court rulings. “Indeed, if there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion or other matter of opinion or force citizens to confess by work or act their faith therein.”
“Collective boycotting activities undertaken to achieve social, political or economic ends is conduct that is protected by the First Amendment,” she continued.
The State of Arizona has said it will appeal the ruling.
You can see an article about the ruling at:
https://tucson.com/news/local/judge-bars-arizona-from-enforcing-law-that-forces-companies-not/article_57c3ef4e-43ac-56e1-a083-9132bfb08177.html?utm_source=Communications&utm_campaign=7147d694ea-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_10_01_01_57&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c67d07604c-7147d694ea-248065289&mc_cid=7147d694ea&mc_eid=1c78b00106
Tim
Central Minnesota Political
PS: You can read the full Minnesota Statute here: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/2017/cite/3.226?keyword_type=all&keyword=israel
Curiously the statute ends with this statement: "This section does not prohibit a vendor from engaging in free speech or expression protected under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution or the Constitution of the state of Minnesota."
So, what was the point?
https://tucson.com/news/local/judge-bars-arizona-from-enforcing-law-that-forces-companies-not/article_57c3ef4e-43ac-56e1-a083-9132bfb08177.html?utm_source=Communications&utm_campaign=7147d694ea-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_10_01_01_57&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_c67d07604c-7147d694ea-248065289&mc_cid=7147d694ea&mc_eid=1c78b00106
Tim
Central Minnesota Political
PS: You can read the full Minnesota Statute here: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/2017/cite/3.226?keyword_type=all&keyword=israel
Curiously the statute ends with this statement: "This section does not prohibit a vendor from engaging in free speech or expression protected under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution or the Constitution of the state of Minnesota."
So, what was the point?
Comments
Post a Comment