There was a multi-year agreement between a union and an elected board to require support on a future tax ballot measure. Any of you constitutional scholars pick that up? That clause is likely upheld by the Cal Supremes, but very shaky by the US Supremes.
It is like placing a personal restriction on fundamental freedom, the way the union handled San Diego mayor. Any LA councilman who objects to the clause would be in violation, immediately, according to the clause, forcing the contract to reopen, against the city taxpayer.
It has a name: An unelected group suppressing personal free speech with a real threat of collective punishment.
No bots, this is the real deal here.
No comments:
Post a Comment