Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Civil Liberties
Related: About this forumRepost from LBN: NRA sues city of L.A. over its new contract disclosure law
https://www.democraticunderground.com/10142307601Source: LA Times
The National Rifle Assn. filed a lawsuit Wednesday challenging a new Los Angeles law requiring companies that seek contracts with the city to disclose whether they have ties to the gun rights group.
The suit was filed in federal court on behalf of the NRA, including a John Doe, who is described in court documents as an NRA member and business operator with several L.A. city contracts.
“Plaintiff Doe participates in this action as a Doe participant because he reasonably fears retribution from the city and the potential loss of lucrative contracts should Doe’s identity be known,” the lawsuit says.
City Councilman Mitch O’Farrell championed the new law, arguing in a motion he presented last year that city residents and stakeholders “deserve to know” whether taxpayer funds are being spent on contractors with ties to the NRA.
Read more: https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-nra-sues-los-angeles-disclosure-law-20190424-story.html
The National Rifle Assn. filed a lawsuit Wednesday challenging a new Los Angeles law requiring companies that seek contracts with the city to disclose whether they have ties to the gun rights group.
The suit was filed in federal court on behalf of the NRA, including a John Doe, who is described in court documents as an NRA member and business operator with several L.A. city contracts.
“Plaintiff Doe participates in this action as a Doe participant because he reasonably fears retribution from the city and the potential loss of lucrative contracts should Doe’s identity be known,” the lawsuit says.
City Councilman Mitch O’Farrell championed the new law, arguing in a motion he presented last year that city residents and stakeholders “deserve to know” whether taxpayer funds are being spent on contractors with ties to the NRA.
Read more: https://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-nra-sues-los-angeles-disclosure-law-20190424-story.html
IMO, this strikes me as being no different than anti-BDS laws.
Gotta go with Robert Bolt on this one:
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/A_Man_for_All_Seasons_(1966_film)
Alice More: Arrest him!
More: Why, what has he done?
Margaret More: He's bad!
More: There is no law against that.
Will Roper: There is! God's law!
More: Then God can arrest him.
Alice: While you talk, he's gone!
More: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law!
Roper: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law!
More: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
Roper: I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws
all being flat?
This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast– man's laws, not God's– and if you cut them down
—and you're just the man to do it—do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then?
Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law for my own safety's sake.
More: Why, what has he done?
Margaret More: He's bad!
More: There is no law against that.
Will Roper: There is! God's law!
More: Then God can arrest him.
Alice: While you talk, he's gone!
More: And go he should, if he was the Devil himself, until he broke the law!
Roper: So now you'd give the Devil benefit of law!
More: Yes. What would you do? Cut a great road through the law to get after the Devil?
Roper: I'd cut down every law in England to do that!
More: Oh? And when the last law was down, and the Devil turned 'round on you, where would you hide, Roper, the laws
all being flat?
This country's planted thick with laws from coast to coast– man's laws, not God's– and if you cut them down
—and you're just the man to do it—do you really think you could stand upright in the winds that would blow then?
Yes, I'd give the Devil benefit of law for my own safety's sake.
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
1 replies, 1447 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (0)
ReplyReply to this post
1 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Repost from LBN: NRA sues city of L.A. over its new contract disclosure law (Original Post)
friendly_iconoclast
Apr 2019
OP
bitterross
(4,066 posts)1. This feels wrong. I think it runs afoul of the Freedom of Assembly clause.
The First Amendment guarantees freedom to peaceably assemble and associate with whomever you wish.
The NRA, deplorable as it may be, has a right to exist. People have a right to become members and not fear the government will somehow punish them for that. LA is not going to be able to take this to its logical end and ban contracts with people associated with the NRA. They should just repeal ordinance and not waste their taxpayer's money defending it.
I don't agree at all this is like BDS. I don't think the comparison is at all apt. With the BDS you have people protesting a Nation State, not a private organization with private members.