Recommended by Ricochet Members Created with Sketch. San Francisco Blatantly Ignores the Equal Protection Clause. Why?

 

Mayor London Breed has announced the Abundant Birth Project which intends to give pregnant people a $1,000/month supplement if they are Black or Pacific Islander. Provision of these sort of benefits is usually done by some proxy, like being poor, etc., and is allowed to have a disparate impact between the races. But here there is no proxy, just an outright provision of benefits depend on race.

I heard the Mayor about a month ago state that she was going to defund the police department to some extent and direct the money to the Black community. I thought that she just made a Kinsley gaffe, revealing that she is racist against non-Black people, but of course she is, who cares? You got a problem with that?

I thought the City Attorney would explain the 14th Amendment to the Constitution to her and clean up her final proposal, but no!

This is not legal scholar theory, it is pretty much Black Letter Law. How did this happen and why did this happen? My theory is that San Francisco is giving an obscene gesture to non-Black people, saying this is the new woke reality and get used to it. The Constitution is optional. She is daring the Federal Justice Department to sue, which is unlikely under a Harris/Biden Administration. Heaven forbid that a pregnant person with standing should sue for violation of their civil rights. She (or he) would find herself fired, evicted, with a vandalized car, and eventually assaulted. Canceled, in other words. That’s a lot for a pregnant woman to take on.

So what do you think happened here?

Published in General
This post was promoted to the Main Feed by a Ricochet Editor at the recommendation of Ricochet members. Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Get your first month free.

There are 47 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. Arahant Member

    Maybe nobody has challenged it?

    • #1
    • September 19, 2020, at 8:01 PM PDT
    • 2 likes
  2. Retail Lawyer Member
    Retail Lawyer

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Maybe nobody has challenged it?

    I think the case must be “ripe” for legal challenge. That means it has to be formalized and rolled out. But seriously, it could only be challenged by a San Francisco resident, and that is a rough place to be on the wrong side of woke.

    • #2
    • September 19, 2020, at 8:06 PM PDT
    • 4 likes
  3. Arahant Member

    Retail Lawyer (View Comment):

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Maybe nobody has challenged it?

    I think the case must be “ripe” for legal challenge. That means it has to be formalized and rolled out. But seriously, it could only be challenged by a San Francisco resident, and that is a rough place to be on the wrong side of woke.

    Understood. Still, someone ought to be advising them better.

    • #3
    • September 19, 2020, at 8:08 PM PDT
    • Like
  4. tigerlily Member

    Nothing much has really changed for the Dems, has it – Racial discrimination now, racial discrimination tomorrow, and racial discrimination forever!

    • #4
    • September 19, 2020, at 8:11 PM PDT
    • 14 likes
  5. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge

    Retail Lawyer (View Comment):

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Maybe nobody has challenged it?

    I think the case must be “ripe” for legal challenge. That means it has to be formalized and rolled out. But seriously, it could only be challenged by a San Francisco resident, and that is a rough place to be on the wrong side of woke.

    It does not matter if somebody does try to challenge. They will just be disregarded for not having standing then personally destroyed. I am not sure where you get your understanding of US law. It must be from some sort of book because real life law is so crooked that it makes a corkscrew look straight.

    • #5
    • September 19, 2020, at 8:39 PM PDT
    • 1 like
  6. Ray Gunner Coolidge

    What happened? Decades of critical race theory has taken possession of the minds of California’s elites–even the lawyers, who should know better.

    From the Mayor’s press release:

    “It is exciting to be in a city that not only calls out racism as a problem, but also takes steps to heal the wounds left by decades of injustice and anti-Black sentiment.”

    What is more self-aggrandizing to these elite narcissists? Ensuring Equal Protection that makes no guarantees as to outcome? Or being a Healer Of The Wounds of Injustice?

    I am sure every lawyer in the City Attorney’s office knows the Equal Protection Clause, Title VII, and California’s Unruh Civil Right Act prohibit all race-based provisions of government services such as this Abundant Birth Project . But to any mind possessed of critical race theory, Equal Protection is a sham, and must be sacrificed to the cause of Cosmic Justice.

    They really believe this stuff.

    • #6
    • September 19, 2020, at 8:47 PM PDT
    • 6 likes
    • This comment has been edited.
  7. DonG (skeptic) Coolidge

    Retail Lawyer: So what do you think happened here?

    Clicking the link, the money is private, so no foul. Also, race is a construct, right?

    • #7
    • September 19, 2020, at 9:00 PM PDT
    • 2 likes
  8. Henry Castaigne Member

    Retail Lawyer: supplement if they are Black or Pacific Islander.

    What do they have against Asians?

    • #8
    • September 19, 2020, at 9:05 PM PDT
    • 3 likes
  9. tigerlily Member

    Ray Gunner (View Comment):

    What happened? Decades of critical race theory has taken possession of the minds of California’s elites–even the lawyers, who should know better.

    From the Mayor’s press release:

    “It is exciting to be in a city that not only calls out racism as a problem, but also takes steps to heal the wounds left by decades of injustice and anti-Black sentiment.”

    What is more self-aggrandizing to these elite narcissists? Providing equal protection under law that makes guarantees as to outcome? Or being a Healer Of The Wounds of Injustice?

    I am sure every lawyer in the City Attorney’s office knows the Equal Protection Clause, Title VII, and California’s Unruh Civil Right Act prohibit all race-based provisions of government services such as this Abundant Birth Project . But to any mind possessed of critical race theory, Equal Protection is a sham, and must be sacrificed to the cause of Cosmic Justice.

    They really believe this stuff.

    If, as the mayor asserts, there have been decades of injustice and anti-black sentiment in San Francisco, then those guilty of these sins are the Democrats and progressives who have run the city (and overwhelmingly populate the city) for decades.

    • #9
    • September 19, 2020, at 9:08 PM PDT
    • 7 likes
  10. Ray Gunner Coolidge

    DonG (skeptic) (View Comment):

    Retail Lawyer: So what do you think happened here?

    Clicking the link, the money is private, so no foul. Also, race is a construct, right?

    Not to pick a nit, but $200K of it is out of the budget of the S.F. Dept. of Public Health. Regardless, it is a foul for the City to make administrative decisions based on race, even if the money is donated. 

    Also, since race is a construct, it seems to me if a pregnant Ginny O’Whitelady identifies as Black, they couldn’t turn her down. 

    • #10
    • September 19, 2020, at 9:17 PM PDT
    • 9 likes
  11. Ray Gunner Coolidge

    tigerlily (View Comment):

    Ray Gunner (View Comment):

    What happened? Decades of critical race theory has taken possession of the minds of California’s elites–even the lawyers, who should know better.

    From the Mayor’s press release:

    “It is exciting to be in a city that not only calls out racism as a problem, but also takes steps to heal the wounds left by decades of injustice and anti-Black sentiment.”

    What is more self-aggrandizing to these elite narcissists? Providing equal protection under law that makes guarantees as to outcome? Or being a Healer Of The Wounds of Injustice?

    I am sure every lawyer in the City Attorney’s office knows the Equal Protection Clause, Title VII, and California’s Unruh Civil Right Act prohibit all race-based provisions of government services such as this Abundant Birth Project . But to any mind possessed of critical race theory, Equal Protection is a sham, and must be sacrificed to the cause of Cosmic Justice.

    They really believe this stuff.

    If, as the mayor asserts, there have been decades of injustice and anti-black sentiment in San Francisco, then those guilty of these sins are the Democrats and progressives who have run the city (and overwhelmingly populate the city) for decades.

    Touche! Just like the President of Princeton. Hey, maybe that’s what we should call it…she pulled a Princeton.

    • #11
    • September 19, 2020, at 9:19 PM PDT
    • 4 likes
  12. Flicker Coolidge

    Figures this was done by someone named Breed. It’s always amusing when people live up to their names.

    • #12
    • September 19, 2020, at 11:50 PM PDT
    • 5 likes
  13. Flicker Coolidge

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    Retail Lawyer: supplement if they are Black or Pacific Islander.

    What do they have against Asians?

    And I though Asian/Pacific Islander was one race

    • #13
    • September 19, 2020, at 11:52 PM PDT
    • Like
  14. Arahant Member

    Flicker (View Comment):
    And I though Asian/Pacific Islander was one race

    Pacific Islander alone is three races.

    • #14
    • September 19, 2020, at 11:56 PM PDT
    • Like
  15. Flicker Coolidge

    Arahant (View Comment):

    Flicker (View Comment):
    And I though Asian/Pacific Islander was one race

    Pacific Islander alone is three races.

    But I mean it here for legal purposes.

    • #15
    • September 20, 2020, at 12:29 AM PDT
    • Like
  16. GrannyDude Member

    Retail Lawyer

    Mayor London Breed has announced the Abundant Birth Project which intends to give pregnant people a $1000/month supplement if they are Black or Pacific Islander

    Dang.

    Is it just me, or does it seem strange that feminist leftist presumably environmentalist mayor is in favor of Abundant Birth?

    On the other hand, not having seen the fine print, if the thousand bucks is for pregnant people (that is, pregnant women) is there a stipulation that said pregnant person must intend to give birth? Could one, for example, get pregnant…sign up for the stipend…get the grand-a-month until, say, the fifth month…terminate the pregnancy…start another pregnancy…and keep this going indefinitely?

     

    • #16
    • September 20, 2020, at 6:08 AM PDT
    • 5 likes
  17. GrannyDude Member

    By the way, it seems that the plan is to means-test:

    The Abundant Birth Project will work with local prenatal care providers and the city’s network of pregnancy support services to identify and enroll eligible clients over the next two years. The project will target low-income and middle-income pregnant people with the income supplement given the high cost of living in San Francisco.

    And also to (it is hoped) extend the benefit into the first two years of life. The concern being addressed by this project is high rates of premature and low-birthweight black and Pacific Island infants. The assumption —faulty, in my view, but anyway—is that the reason black infants are at risk of these negative outcomes is higher stress and/or poor pre-natal care and nutrition due to racism. 

    I think this is almost certainly the wrong explanation for the phenomenon at issue, and I’d agree it is tiresome and counterproductive for “it’s racism!” to be the “settled science.” Having said that, it seems likely to me that the prospect of receiving an extra 12 grand a year, no strings attached, might actually prompt more black pregnant San Franciscans to keep their babies. 

    I just wish they’d consider the stress a pregnant woman experiences when she has to dodge blobs of human feces on her way to the obstetrician’s office.

     

    • #17
    • September 20, 2020, at 6:26 AM PDT
    • 6 likes
  18. Retail Lawyer Member
    Retail Lawyer

    GrannyDude (View Comment):

    I think this is almost certainly the wrong explanation for the phenomenon at issue, and I’d agree it is tiresome and counterproductive for “it’s racism!” to be the “settled science.” Having said that, it seems likely to me that the prospect of receiving an extra 12 grand a year, no strings attached, might actually prompt more black pregnant San Franciscans to keep their babies.

    To be sure. San Francisco periodically makes gestures to retain Blacks and parents in the City. Both groups have been in decline for decades, and this may be a worthy goal. It is the blatantly racial language, the dropping of the proxy language that I find so upsetting. How is this not a slap in face to the rule-of-law people? How is this not a dare? I imagine legions of City Attorneys saying, “Whattya gonna do about it?”

     

    • #18
    • September 20, 2020, at 7:33 AM PDT
    • 1 like
  19. Full Size Tabby Member

    Retail Lawyer (View Comment):

    GrannyDude (View Comment):

    I think this is almost certainly the wrong explanation for the phenomenon at issue, and I’d agree it is tiresome and counterproductive for “it’s racism!” to be the “settled science.” Having said that, it seems likely to me that the prospect of receiving an extra 12 grand a year, no strings attached, might actually prompt more black pregnant San Franciscans to keep their babies.

    To be sure. San Francisco periodically makes gestures to retain Blacks and parents in the City. Both groups have been in decline for decades, and this may be a worthy goal. It is the blatantly racial language, the dropping of the proxy language that I find so upsetting. How is this not a slap in face to the rule-of-law people? How is this not a dare? I imagine legions of City Attorneys saying, “Whattya gonna do about it?”

     

    There have been plenty of other episodes in recent years to suggest that San Francisco government does not care about the rule of law. In particular, San Francisco government is not bothered by how civil rights protected by the U.S. Constitution might limit local rule-making. San Francisco has made in the last couple of years several rules that blatantly discriminate against citizens and organizations on the basis of religion, speech, petitioning the government, and interest in civil rights (second amendment in particular).

    • #19
    • September 20, 2020, at 9:31 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  20. Addiction Is A Choice Member

    Retail Lawyer (View Comment):
    I imagine legions of City Attorneys saying, “Whattya gonna do about it?”

    San Francisco District Attorney Chesa Boudin comes from a long line of left-wing crazies. His parents were convicted of murder, so he was raised by his adoptive-parents Bernadine Dorn and Bill Ayers…Bill Ayers? Obama’s Gepetto Bill Ayers? The same.

    And that smug, “Whattya gonna do about it?” attitude? They come by it naturally.

    • #20
    • September 20, 2020, at 10:55 AM PDT
    • 3 likes
  21. GrannyDude Member

    Retail Lawyer (View Comment):

    GrannyDude (View Comment):

    I think this is almost certainly the wrong explanation for the phenomenon at issue, and I’d agree it is tiresome and counterproductive for “it’s racism!” to be the “settled science.” Having said that, it seems likely to me that the prospect of receiving an extra 12 grand a year, no strings attached, might actually prompt more black pregnant San Franciscans to keep their babies.

    To be sure. San Francisco periodically makes gestures to retain Blacks and parents in the City. Both groups have been in decline for decades, and this may be a worthy goal. It is the blatantly racial language, the dropping of the proxy language that I find so upsetting. How is this not a slap in face to the rule-of-law people? How is this not a dare? I imagine legions of City Attorneys saying, “Whattya gonna do about it?”

     

    Oh, I’m with you on that. Are there no white or whatever mothers in SF who find the cost of living there prohibitively high; who are at risk for underweight or premature babies and could use some extra buckage to offset the cost of prenatal vitamins or maternity wear? 

    In the wake of two (!) prominent “black” women recently coming out as imposters, not only will the program presumably have to demand proof of pregnancy but also proof of blackness. Some enterprising not-really-black-but-what-the-heck SF moms-to-be might think about getting a perm and a nice tan before heading to the clinic for the ultrasound?

    • #21
    • September 20, 2020, at 11:36 AM PDT
    • 2 likes
  22. GrannyDude Member

    The program as it stands could possibly be justified if the planners were willing to say that underweight babies or premature delivery are, like sickle-cell anemia, a genetic risk for black and PI mothers, though of course, it’s a little difficult to see how just handing someone a thousand dollars a month will mitigate that risk unless it is spent in specific ways. 

    In any case, the article I read explicitly declared any such biological explanation for the phenomenon verboten…”racism” is the only possible explanation, though—again—I don’t quite see why a cash hand-out is the solution to this either. 

    What I will say is that, as a rule, I prefer the government to hand needy people cash and let them figure out how to spend it if the alternative is giving money with lots and lots of strings that effectively prevent someone from improving her life as she, individually, sees fit. 

    For instance, if any given black or pacific islander mother wishes to, she could save the $1000 a month until she had enough money to, as K.W. memorably put it, “rent a U-Haul” and get the heck out of expensive, and apparently stress fully-racist San Francisco.

    • #22
    • September 20, 2020, at 11:43 AM PDT
    • Like
  23. kedavis Member

    My first thought on reading this? “Parents” who will milk the system for $1000/month plus whatever else they can get, and then have a taxpayer-paid “late term” or even “partial birth” abortion.

    • #23
    • September 20, 2020, at 12:38 PM PDT
    • 1 like
  24. kedavis Member

    GrannyDude (View Comment):

    Retail Lawyer:

    Mayor London Breed has announced the Abundant Birth Project which intends to give pregnant people a $1000/month supplement if they are Black or Pacific Islander

    Dang.

    Is it just me, or does it seem strange that feminist leftist presumably environmentalist mayor is in favor of Abundant Birth?

    On the other hand, not having seen the fine print, if the thousand bucks is for pregnant people (that is, pregnant women) is there a stipulation that said pregnant person must intend to give birth? Could one, for example, get pregnant…sign up for the stipend…get the grand-a-month until, say, the fifth month…terminate the pregnancy…start another pregnancy…and keep this going indefinitely?

    Why “terminate” at month 5? As I noted earlier, we’re talking about people who are fully on board for late-term and even partial-birth abortion.

    • #24
    • September 20, 2020, at 4:50 PM PDT
    • 1 like
    • This comment has been edited.
  25. kedavis Member

    GrannyDude (View Comment):

    For instance, if any given black or pacific islander mother wishes to, she could save the $1000 a month until she had enough money to, as K.W. memorably put it, “rent a U-Haul” and get the heck out of expensive, and apparently stress fully-racist San Francisco.

    That would be nice, but I expect a spike in taxpayer-funded crack babies.

    • #25
    • September 20, 2020, at 4:53 PM PDT
    • Like
  26. Arahant Member

    kedavis (View Comment):
    That would be nice, but I expect a spike in taxpayer-funded crack babies.

    • #26
    • September 20, 2020, at 4:59 PM PDT
    • Like
  27. kedavis Member

    Arahant (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):
    That would be nice, but I expect a spike in taxpayer-funded crack babies.

    What if my previous comment IS the bright side, and the other side is increased funding for bloods and crips? (And BLM, and Antifa…)

    • #27
    • September 20, 2020, at 5:18 PM PDT
    • 1 like
  28. Henry Castaigne Member

    kedavis (View Comment):
    kedavis

    My first thought on reading this? “Parents” who will milk the system for $1000/month plus whatever else they can get, and then have a taxpayer-paid “late term” or even “partial birth” abortion.

    My first thought after reading your first response is that I identify as a black Pacific Islander who lives in San Francisco. 

    • #28
    • September 20, 2020, at 5:37 PM PDT
    • 4 likes
  29. kedavis Member

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):
    kedavis

    My first thought on reading this? “Parents” who will milk the system for $1000/month plus whatever else they can get, and then have a taxpayer-paid “late term” or even “partial birth” abortion.

    My first thought after reading your first response is that I identify as a black Pacific Islander who lives in San Francisco.

    Don’t forget female. And pregnant.

    • #29
    • September 20, 2020, at 5:58 PM PDT
    • 1 like
  30. Fake John/Jane Galt Coolidge

    kedavis (View Comment):

    Henry Castaigne (View Comment):

    kedavis (View Comment):
    kedavis

    My first thought on reading this? “Parents” who will milk the system for $1000/month plus whatever else they can get, and then have a taxpayer-paid “late term” or even “partial birth” abortion.

    My first thought after reading your first response is that I identify as a black Pacific Islander who lives in San Francisco.

    Don’t forget female. And pregnant.

    Can you just feel like you are female and pregnant?

    • #30
    • September 20, 2020, at 7:58 PM PDT
    • 2 likes