Attorney General Kamala Harris will intervene on the Sodomite Suppression Act

Yesterday, Attorney General Kamala Harris announced she will intervene and block the ridiculous Sodomite Suppression Act proposal, which calls for us (gay folks) to be shot in the head.

In a press release, Kamala said:

"As Attorney General of California, it is my sworn duty to uphold the California and United States Constitutions and to protect the rights of all Californians. This proposal not only threatens public safety, it is patently unconstitutional, utterly reprehensible, and has no place in a civil society. Today, I am filing an action for declaratory relief with the Court seeking judicial authorization for relief from the duty to prepare and issue the title and summary for the 'Sodomite Suppression Act.' If the Court does not grant this relief, my office will be forced to issue a title and summary for a proposal that seeks to legalize discrimination and vigilantism."

More to come.

California Activist files Intolerant Jackass Act to combat the Sodomite Suppression Act

Since the broke ass "Sodomite Suppression Act," may be unstoppable. Activist Charlotte Laws has filed the Intolerant Jackass Act to combat it. The proposal is the opposite of the SSA that points out the ignorance surrounding the anti-gay document.

Here's more:

Laws’ proposal cleverly mirrors and skewers the Sodomite Suppression Act, explaining that the “abominable crime known as prejudice against sexual orientation” is “a destructive view that society commands us to suppress.” Thus:

c) Any person, herein known as an "Intolerant Jackass," who brings forth a ballot measure that suggests the killing of gays and/or lesbians, whether this measure is called the Sodomite Suppression Act or is known by some other name, shall be required to attend sensitivity training for at least three (3) hours per month for twelve (12) consecutive months. In addition, the offender or "Intolerant Jackass" must donate $5000 to a pro-gay or pro-lesbian organization.
I spoke to Laws about her initiative—which, she readily acknowledges, is not necessarily designed to become law.

“I’m fighting fire with fire,” she told me. “The only way to counter [the Sodomite Suppression Act] is … to let people know that most people in California don’t agree with something as incendiary and hateful as what this one attorney proposed.” Laws recognizes the merit of having a content-neutral initiative system, but she believes “we have a very open-minded state and country. This is one guy, and there are millions of us who do not agree with this.”

Charlotte is a former politician and community activist in Los Angeles. If you get the chance, check her out.

source

The "Sodomite Suppression Act" could be circulated

Weeks ago, super loon Matt McLaughlin, some lawyer from the OC, submitted the infamous "Sodomite Suppression Act", which says that we should be put to death with bullets in our heads.

This act will never be a law, never! But it may clear circulation this coming May, and Attorney General Kamala Harris may not be able to stop it.

The state Supreme Court has the power to keep measures off the ballot if they violate the California Constitution. It has exercised that power to disqualify measures that cover more than one subject, broadly defined, and to block last year’s attempt by legislative Democrats to seek a statewide advisory vote on a U.S. constitutional amendment that would limit corporate spending in federal elections. Presumably the justices could locate a state constitutional provision that would discourage shooting people in the head.

But McLaughlin’s measure is currently before Harris, whose options appear to be limited. Once the sponsor has paid the required fee, state law directs the attorney general to prepare a title and a maximum 100-word summary of the initiative and forward it to the secretary of state for a 90-day period of public signature-gathering. The secretary of state’s website says Harris is scheduled to take those actions by about May 4.

Does she have the power to refuse if the measure is patently unconstitutional? Harris isn’t saying; her office did not return repeated phone calls. But some veteran practitioners of election law said they don’t think so.

“The statute is clear: that the office has to prepare a summary provided the proponents have paid $200 and followed the right procedures,” said attorney Robert Stern, author of the state’s 1974 Political Reform Act. He said he’s never heard of a case in which the attorney general refused to issue a title and summary.

I'm not worried about this. It's very clear this act will never come to pass, but the idea of the act is just inhumane. I hope this Matt McLaughlin is monitored.

source