Become a Clash Insider!
Don’t let Big Tech pre-chew your news. Sign up for our free email newsletter, and we’ll keep you in the loop.
If Democrats believe in the Constitution, why do the laws they pass keep getting struck down as unconstitutional?
As many of us know by now, Democrats have abandoned any pretense of supporting ‘equality’ and have replaced it with a counterfeit copycat ‘equity’.
Dems are counting on most of us not looking too closely at what makes those two ideas different from each other… because if we do, ordinary apolitical Americans will be shocked by the implications.
This judicial ruling highlights precisely what the difference between those philosophies is.
In 2018, there was a change made to California law that made very specific demands on how corporations were required to be run. Here is an excerpt of that law. (Full text here.)
SEC. 2. Section 301.3 is added to the Corporations Code, to read:
301.3. (a) No later than the close of the 2019 calendar year, a publicly held domestic or foreign corporation whose principal executive offices, according to the corporation’s SEC 10-K form, are located in California shall have a minimum of one female director on its board. A corporation may increase the number of directors on its board to comply with this section.
(b) No later than the close of the 2021 calendar year, a publicly held domestic or foreign corporation whose principal executive offices, according to the corporation’s SEC 10-K form, are located in California shall comply with the following:
(1) If its number of directors is six or more, the corporation shall have a minimum of three female directors.
(2) If its number of directors is five, the corporation shall have a minimum of two female directors.
(3) If its number of directors is four or fewer, the corporation shall have a minimum of one female director.
(c) No later than July 1, 2019, the Secretary of State shall publish a report on its Internet Web site documenting the number of domestic and foreign corporations whose principal executive offices, according to the corporation’s SEC 10-K form, are located in California and who have at least one female director.
Judicial Watch challenged those changes to the law as being in violation of the constitution, specifically, the equal protection clause.
Judicial Watch filed the gender quota lawsuit in Los Angeles County Superior Court in 2019, on behalf of California taxpayers, Robin Crest, Earl De Vries and Judy De Vries. The lawsuit challenges a 2018 law, known as Senate Bill 826, which requires every publicly held corporation headquartered in California to have at least one director “who self-identifies her gender as a woman” on its board of directors by December 31, 2019. The law also requires corporations to have up to three such persons on their boards by December 31, 2021, depending on the size of the board. Judicial Watch argued that the quota for women on corporate boards violates the Equal Protection Clause of the California Constitution.
…In the Court’s 23-page verdict, the Court specifically found that “S.B. 826’s goal was to achieve general equity or parity; its goal was not to boost California’s economy, not to improve opportunities for women in the workplace nor not to protect California taxpayers, public employees, pensions and retirees.” Further, the Court found that “putting more women on boards demonstrated that the Legislature’s actual purpose was gender-balancing, not remedying discrimination.” “There is no Compelling Governmental interest in remedying discrimination in the board selection process because neither the Legislature nor Defendant could identify any specific, purposeful, intentional and unlawful discrimination to be remedied,” Judge Duffy-Lewis said.
“The Court eviscerated California’s unconstitutional gender quota mandate. This is the second California court decision finding that quotas for corporate boards are unconstitutional. The radical Left’s unprecedented attacks on anti-discrimination law has suffered another stinging defeat,” stated Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “Thankfully, California courts have upheld the core American value of equal protection under the law. Judicial Watch’s taxpayer clients are heroes for standing up for civil rights against the Left’s pernicious efforts to undo anti-discrimination protections. Judicial Watch’s legal team has helped protect the civil rights of every American with these successful lawsuits.” —JudicalWatch
Here’s a brief summary of the case itself:
California Superior Court Judge Maureen Duffy-Lewis Friday entered a verdict to enjoin California’s Senate Bill 826 (SB 826) after finding that the law violated Article I, Section 7 of the California Constitution.
The law, enacted in October, 2018, requires publicly held corporations in California to have one or more female directors for boards with four or fewer directors, 2 or more female directors for boards with five directors and three or more female directors for boards with six or more directors. The Secretary of State may impose a $100,000 fine for violation of this law and a $300,000 fine for subsequent violations.
…After considering depositions and testimony from female board of directors, discrimination experts and a senator, Judge Duffy-Lewis found Plaintiffs proved SB 826 was “presumptively unconstitutional” and “carried their burden to prove that men and women are similarly situated for purposes of SB 826’s gender-based quota.” The burden of proof then shifted to California to show that SB 826 satisfied strict scrutiny by proving “(1) a compelling state interest, (2) that S.B. 826 is necessary and (3) that S.B. 826 is narrowly tailored.” — Jurist
One of the celebrated voices of their racial radicals’ own side admitted that equity is intentionally designed to punish one group and favor another. Ibrahim X Kendi has defended his statement, ‘The only remedy to present discrimination is future discrimination.’
Equity, instead of Equality, is the woke embodiment of exactly that principle. No matter how much Joe Biden’s administration might LOVE the concept, it has been struck down as Constitutional again and again when challenged in court.
Simply, because it violates the Equal Protection Clause of the Constitution.
Psalms of War: Prayers That Literally Kick Ass is a collection, from the book of Psalms, regarding how David rolled in prayer. I bet you haven’t heard these read, prayed, or sung in church against our formidable enemies — and therein lies the Church’s problem. We’re not using the spiritual weapons God gave us to waylay the powers of darkness. It might be time to dust them off and offer ‘em up if you’re truly concerned about the state of Christ’s Church and of our nation.
Also included in this book, Psalms of War, are reproductions of the author’s original art from his Biblical Badass Series of oil paintings.
This is a great gift for the prayer warriors. Real. Raw. Relevant.