Pisco

And listen, I'm a liberal Democrat.

And I so I put my cards on my on my chest.

But, yeah, I kind of don't like these bad arguments from Democrats that, oh, this law is just about reproductive services.

And then you just go back and look at their track record and they're happy to use them to protect the religious liberties of other people when it suits them.

And, um, there are some things that, uh, AG Ellison has done that I've, that I've liked.

Um, but in general, yeah, I think that that's like a bit of hypocrisy on that.

And additionally, what that article, I think details is his unwillingness to do anything about this specifically putting aside the face act violations.

Um,

There are potentially like, you know, trespass statutes that could be applied here and other state analogs.

And it doesn't seem like he has any willingness to do that.

I'm not saying that he should, but it's just something that people should take into consideration when sort of judging that conduct.

If you think that that's acceptable, you're essentially saying that the law breaking in this context, which probably was some form of trespass, is justified given the interest.

Now, I'm somewhat sympathetic to certain arguments to that effect, given what ICE is doing and the overwhelming illegality there.

But it is a determination that you're going to have to make if you want to defend the actions or inaction.

Yeah, no doubt about that.

And you put out a bunch of great points there.

I want to hit them all.

The first is the legislative basis for the law in the first place.

Putting aside the First Amendment issues like where does Congress derive that authority to even legislate in this domain?

It's a government of limited powers that has been sustained under the Congress's Commerce Clause abilities.