Here is Ken Paxton, telling you that you have no right to boycott Israel. I hate these neocon boomers so god dam much.
Miga
Boycott Texas
>>535877722>>535877798>>535877850It's been in place for a long time, just like 37 other states whose Legislatures, one by one on their own, passed a law for their own state.This isn't newsNo high-ranking politician, state or national, is 'on your side'(they just got rid of Massie)
>>535877722>taxpayers have to pay me to boycott israelno they don't
>>535877722>NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO>YOU HAVE TO BE MAD AT ISRAEL FOR BOMBING MUSLIMSnopebombing muslims is literally the only good thing they do
>>535877722That judge was either bribed or blackmailed.
>>535877722So the make America great again guy is telling you to buy Israeli goods, not American that’s antisemitism.
>>535878664Bet he was a jew.
>>535877722>Here is Ken Paxton, telling you that you have no right to boycott Israel.That isn't the law, the law is you can boycott Israel all you want but you can't get state money if you do. Talarico is a homo who believes in 6 genders.
>>535880691It means that if you even associate or partner, deal with a business, project, or contractor that receives state funds you need to sign the no-boycott pledge.
>>535877722Isn't this literally just a ruling that in this particular lawsuit the plaintiff literally does not have grounz? Or standing rather. And with no opinion as to the validity of the law itself?
>>535882102Its an infringement on his future rights
>>535882282>"The Fifth Circuit recognised that the plaintiff does not have any live claims against a law that doesn't apply to them">Law says companies of over 10 people, the case was apparently brought by a sole proprietor (i.e. company of 1 person)If this is accurate reporting (haha, lmao) then this seems to say literally nothing about the law itself, only that the plaintiff is unaffected by it therefore the court will not be ruling on whether a law that does not apply is "fair" or not to a plaintiff that is literally unaffected.In which case, anyone including the same guy could bring the same lawsuit again if or when they have a company of 10 people or more and get denied a government deal of $100k or more, which would cause the actual merits of the law to be judged, and this case does not affect that situation at all.Again if the reporting is accurate and complete. I'm going entirely off the screenshot here.
