eye95
Well-known member
Here, again, is the part of the proposed law that prohibits behavior say the States and by state actors, including law enforcement, and defines recourse:
None of the recourse in this bill is any different than the recourses already available to individuals who find a State law, or the enforcement thereof, to violate Rights. State and local governments already can be sued to remove laws that violate Rights—and be forced to compensate victims for costs and damages. Law enforcement can already be brought up on federal criminal charges for violating the Rights of citizens.
This is nothing new. The feds already have this kind of authority and have used it. This is merely a new application, one that a patchwork of State and local laws has proven is necessary.
All such laws, rules, or regulations in existence at the time of adoption or passed into existence after adoption of this act are null and void. Any attempts to enforce such laws after adoption of this act are punishable under law [outlined elsewhere] and subject to civil action [outlined elsewhere] by the Person upon whom enforced.
All such laws, rules, or regulations must be repealed within two years of adoption of this act. Any such laws, rules, or regulations remaining after two years may be removed by civil action with all costs being borne by the governmental agency responsible for the law, rule, or regulation.
None of the recourse in this bill is any different than the recourses already available to individuals who find a State law, or the enforcement thereof, to violate Rights. State and local governments already can be sued to remove laws that violate Rights—and be forced to compensate victims for costs and damages. Law enforcement can already be brought up on federal criminal charges for violating the Rights of citizens.
This is nothing new. The feds already have this kind of authority and have used it. This is merely a new application, one that a patchwork of State and local laws has proven is necessary.