π΄ Website π https://u-s-news.com/
Telegram π https://t.me/usnewscom_channel
The Albany legislators who put Proposition 1 on our Election Day ballots should go back to the drawing board and not come back until they have anΒ honestΒ ballot proposal to show us.
The Prop 1 weβre considering Tuesday is deceptive, malicious and sleazy.
First, the bait: Prop 1 has been falsely marketed as an amendment to the New York state Constitution thatβs critically needed to protect abortion rights after the US Supreme Court overturnedΒ Roe v. WadeΒ in 2022.
Well, thatβs just demagogic scare-mongering, because abortion has been legal in New York since beforeΒ Roe was ever decided.
New York is not even remotely affected byΒ Dobbs v. Jackson, the case that nullified Roe β and abortion rights in factΒ were expandedΒ in the Empire State afterΒ Dobbs was handed down.
But fine, if legislators want to add redundant abortion protection to the state constitution, then propose an amendment that does so straightforwardly.
Maybe something like this: βEvery individual who becomes pregnant has the fundamental right to choose to carry the pregnancy to term, to give birth to a child, or to have an abortion.β
Thatβs language straight from Article 25-A of New York stateβs Reproductive Health Act.
Voters would understand what that means and we would pass it, unnecessary as it may be.
But that isnβt Prop 1.
Now, the switch: Many families in New York are alarmed and outraged that Prop 1 would create special rights for transgenderΒ minorsΒ .
It certainly does that.
Section AΒ of the proposed amendment bans discrimination on the basis of βgender identity, gender expressionβ and βage,β among other categories.
Protecting βgender identityβ and βgender expressionβ alone gives biological menΒ the right to participate in womenβs sportsΒ (and toΒ injure them physically), to liveΒ in womenβs dorms, to wash inΒ womenβs gym showers, and to be incarcerated inΒ womenβs prisonsΒ β all controversial actions that are already happening, albeit without explicit legal validation.
But because Section A also protects βage,β it creates transgender rightsΒ without age discriminationΒ β meaning full rights forΒ children, not just adults, to alter their βgender identityβ and βgender expression.β
βFull rightsβ means parents can beΒ legally liableΒ for stepping in to stop their own childβs choice, based on an all-too-common passing fancy, to receive irreversible chemical treatments or surgical procedures.
Prop 1 activists disavow these consequences, but Section Aβs βequal rightsβ for βgender identity, gender expressionβΒ plusΒ βageβ leave judges no alternative.
Still, if Albany legislators want to expand non-discrimination protections to transgender adults and to transgenderΒ minors, bring us an amendment worded to do just that.
We would understand what it says and we can vote on it.
Just donβt roll abortion rights up with transgender minor rights into one single ballot proposal, using one as a Trojan horse to smuggle in the other.
Many New Yorkers support abortion rights, but not transgenderΒ minorΒ rights.
Worse still, Section A sneaks bans of a whoppingΒ 11Β new categories ofΒ sweepingly, vaguely definedΒ discrimination into the state Constitution, all within the Trojan horse of abortion rights.
Thatβs not democracy in good faith.
Finally, the con: Most sleazy is Prop 1βsΒ Section B.
ItΒ takes awayΒ equal rights from politically out-of-favor people.
Disguised by convoluted legalese to resemble innocent boilerplate fine print that voters will dismiss β itβs not even mentioned in theΒ ballotβs officially publicized descriptionΒ β Section B gives a free pass to any discrimination that would otherwise be banned by Section A, as long as that discrimination is alleged to βprevent or dismantleβ another discrimination.
In effect, Section B legalizesΒ reverse discrimination, legal scholars assert.
Moreover, the word βpreventβ in Section B allows forΒ anticipatoryΒ reverse discrimination β to repair alleged discriminations that havenβt even happened yet!
Prop 1 activists mutter that whatever (reverse) discrimination Section B may allow, weβll still have anti-discrimination protection under the US Constitution.
Thatβs hardly reassuring: The federal reverse discrimination lawsuits culminating in victory in 2023βsΒ SFFA vs. HarvardΒ costΒ millions of dollarsΒ and decades of injustice.
Why even append Section B, which has nothing to do with abortion, transgender rights, or any of the other new Section A categories, and actuallyΒ deprivesΒ some New Yorkers of their rights?
Still, if Albany legislators want to reiterate abortion rights, create new transgender rights, or even legalize reverse discrimination . . . bring us separate, clear, honest ballot proposals for each of those purposes.
Donβt trick voters.
Meanwhile, New Yorkers: Letβs vote down this deceitful, sneaky and damaging Prop 1.
Wai Wah Chin is the founding president of the Chinese American Citizens Alliance Greater New York.