HIT & RUN BLOG Ted Cruz, Sex Toys, and the Constitution

[Sanguine]

In 2007 Texas Solicitor General Ted Cruz urged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit to reject a constitutional challenge to the state's ban on the sale of sex toys. "There is no substantive-due-process right to stimulate one's genitals for non-medical purposes unrelated to procreation or outside of an interpersonal relationship," Cruz and his office argued. The 5th Circuit disagreed and struck down the sex toy ban.

Yesterday on CNN, Cruz was asked about that case. "I spent five and a half years as the solicitor general in Texas. I worked for the attorney general. The attorney general's job is to defend the laws passed by the Texas legislature," he told host Dana Bash.

"One of those laws was a law restricting the sale of sex toys. A stupid law. Listen, I am one of the most libertarian members of the Senate. I think it is idiotic....I am saying that consenting adults should be able to do whatever they want in their bedrooms."

Do those comments mean that Cruz now thinks that Texas took the wrong legal position in the case? Does he think that the 5th Circuit got it right when it struck down the sex toy ban? Not necessarily.

The underlying question in the case was whether federal courts can use the Due Process Clause of the 14th Amendment—which says that states may not deprive any person of life, liberty, or property without due process of law—to invalidate a duly enacted state regulation.

That underlying question has been the driving force behind some of the biggest cases in American constitutional law. In 1905, for example, the Supreme Court was asked whether a New York law forbidding bakery employees from working more than 10 hours a day or 60 hours a week violated the Due Process Clause. The Court ruled that it did and struck down the offending provision in Lochner v. New York....

http://reason.com/blog/2017/09/14/ted-cruz-sex-toys-and-the-constitution

[Chosen Daughter]

So he defended an existing law even though he didn't necessarily agree with it, maybe?

I am only holding him responsible for not disciplining whoever liked porn on his page.  I would not have staff like that when my own personal belief, faith and family ideals are contrary to it.  Contradiction.

I still would vote for Ted Cruz in a second.

[Sanguine]

So he defended an existing law even though he didn't necessarily agree with it, maybe?

I am only holding him responsible for not disciplining whoever liked porn on his page.  I would not have staff like that when my own personal belief, faith and family ideals are contrary to it.  Contradiction.

I still would vote for Ted Cruz in a second.

Yep.  That's what all the dustup is about.

And, we are assuming that he didn't discipline someone.  He may have done so.

[Chosen Daughter]

Yep.  That's what all the dustup is about.

And, we are assuming that he didn't discipline someone.  He may have done so.

Yes, he could have.

[TomSea]

Always someone else lying.

Campaign says Rubio said something he didn't about the Bible, oh, someone else did it, campaign says in Iowa, Carson is dropping out and in Hawaii, Rubio is dropping out, oh, someone else did it.

Then, there's the matter of the hurricane bill, said it was filled with pork which everyone agrees with,  it was not.

Always someone else lying.

[Sanguine]

Always someone else lying.

Campaign says Rubio said something he didn't about the Bible, oh, someone else did it, campaign says in Iowa, Carson is dropping out and in Hawaii, Rubio is dropping out, oh, someone else did it.

Then, there's the matter of the hurricane bill, said it was filled with pork which everyone agrees with,  it was not.

Always someone else lying.

In all fairness, Tom, some people are just intractably misinformed.

[Chosen Daughter]

Always someone else lying.

Campaign says Rubio said something he didn't about the Bible, oh, someone else did it, campaign says in Iowa, Carson is dropping out and in Hawaii, Rubio is dropping out, oh, someone else did it.

Then, there's the matter of the hurricane bill, said it was filled with pork which everyone agrees with,  it was not.

Always someone else lying.

 http://thefederalist.com/2017/08/31/sandy-relief-bill-chock-full-pork/

[Hoodat]

Then, there's the matter of the hurricane bill, said it was filled with pork which everyone agrees with,  it was not.

Always someone else lying.

Again:


The Pork Filled and Expensive Non-Relief Sandy Relief Bill

Katie Pavlich     |     Posted: Jan 02, 2013 3:00 PM


It's been 66 days since Hurricane Sandy slammed into the East Coast, causing major damage in New York and New Jersey. The storm was so powerful, it is in the running to become the most expensive storm for taxpayers on record. Historically, Congress has passed hurricane relief bills in the immediate aftermath of storm damage, but Sandy is a different story. Why? Congress wrote up Hurricane Sandy Relief legislation and then Harry Reid's Senate loaded it with pork. What's in it? Many things that hardly count as relief for victims.

    The pork-barrel feast includes more than $8 million to buy cars and equipment for the Homeland Security and Justice departments. It also includes a whopping $150 million for the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration to dole out to fisheries in Alaska and $2 million for the Smithsonian Institution to repair museum roofs in DC.

    An eye-popping $13 billion would go to “mitigation” projects to prepare for future storms.

    Other big-ticket items in the bill include $207 million for the VA Manhattan Medical Center; $41 million to fix up eight military bases along the storm’s path, including Guantanamo Bay, Cuba; $4 million for repairs at Kennedy Space Center in Florida; $3.3 million for the Plum Island Animal Disease Center and $1.1 million to repair national cemeteries.

    Budget watchdogs have dubbed the 94-page emergency-spending bill “Sandy Scam.”

More:

    $58.8 million for forest restoration on private land.
    $197 million “to… protect coastal ecosystems and habitat impacted by Hurricane Sandy.”
    $10.78 billion for public transportation, most of which is allocated to future construction and improvements, not disaster relief.
    $17 billion for wasteful Community Development Block Grants (CDBG), a program that has become notorious for its use as a backdoor earmark program.

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2013/01/02/the-pork-filled-and-expensive-nonrelief-sandy-relief-bill-n1477710


Someone is definitely lying here, but it isn't Ted Cruz.  It is the person regurgitating DNC talking points even after they had already been debunked on these boards.

[RoosGirl]

Do we really need thread after thread that combines Ted Cruz, Donald Trump and sex toys?

I *will* break out the brain bleach again!

[jpsb]

Do we really need thread after thread that combines Ted Cruz, Donald Trump and sex toys?

I *will* break out the brain bleach again!

No one mentioned Trump until now. Why bring Trump into this thread it's got nothing to do with Trump.

[RoosGirl]

No one mentioned Trump until now. Why bring Trump into this thread it's got nothing to do with Trump.

He was discussed in the accompanying thread.

[jmyrlefuller]

Always someone else lying.

Always you, trolling.