School Contractor in Texas Denied Work Over Pro-Israel Loyalty Oath | Hacker News Reader

School Contractor in Texas Denied Work Over Pro-Israel Loyalty Oath

theintercept.com

42 pointsdeogeo16 comments

Isn't that obvious that the oath is against the 1st amendment? Can't believe this.

It probably isn't constitutional, but the process is that things don't get actually declared unconstitutional until someone with standing (this woman who lost her job) sues and the courts decide the question.

And that's exactly what she's doing. The lawsuit names the 1st and 14th Amendments in its cause of action, says that political speech is important, and that there's Supreme Court precedent that boycotts count as political speech.

Then it asks the judge to declare the law unconstitutional and unenforceable. As well as some other stuff like declaring void such provisions in existing contracts, issuing an injunction against including the provision in future contracts, etc.

> until someone with standing...

Unfortunately that isn't proven in this case, because proving that a person has standing can be an entire legal fight unto itself.

First, arguably she's a contractor because she's signed a contract with the state of Texas. So she has to argue that protections of the first and fourteenth amendments extend to contractors. That's not necessarily a given.

Second, it's a state issue, not necessarily a federal issue. IOW, she has to prove the federal constitution amendments are applicable to a state contract.

Third, it must be that she was not hired due to the pro-israel loyalty language, and not for any other reason.

That's just the standing.

Then she has to prove that the language actually violates the first and fourteenth amendment, and it's unclear that it does.

I don’t find your other arguments particularly compelling, but this one is definitely wrong:

> Third, it must be that she was not hired due to the pro-israel loyalty language, and not for any other reason.

She had already been hired, and worked for several years. The loyalty clause was then added, and she lost her job due to being unwilling to sign that clause. She has plenty of evidence that it was due to not signing (ie, her boss tried to get around her having to sign it, but was forced to conclude that it was unavoidable).

Weird, in the article there's an image of the affirmation in Texas code. The second section has definitions, and the second definition starts:

> 2. "Company" means a ...

But the word "company" isn't used elsewhere in that image, so why are they defining it?

Maybe the affirmation image is clipped in such a way to remove the use of that word. Or maybe the law was really that shoddily written.

It's from the Intercept. While I like Glenn Greenwald's reporting on many things, when it comes to Israel he has quite a bee in his bonnet, so to speak. I would take this with a grain of salt until it is verified by another source.

https://www.texastribune.org/2018/12/17/Bahia-Amawi-pflugerv...

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politic...

https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/texas-speech-pathologist-fir...

https://www.thedailybeast.com/texas-elementary-school-speech...

https://www.timesofisrael.com/kentucky-bars-state-contractor...

https://unitedwithisrael.org/kentucky-becomes-26th-us-state-...

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/anti-bds-legislation

Will these do?

Indeed! Yes. Thank you.

Also: https://arcdigital.media/is-texas-willing-to-violate-the-con...

Asking to affirm you are not boycotting and will not boycott Israel is a far cry from a "Pro-Israel Loyalty Oath".

Companies that do business with Texas have to sign an agreement that includes that statement about Israel. It's part of Texas's standard agreement with vendors...

So sad, but how is it related to HN?

How could this possibly be Constitutional? I can understand how Conservatives in those state are co-opted by Right Wing Religious groups.

Reading this article made me physically ill.

> I can understand how Conservatives in those state are co-opted by Right Wing Religious groups.

Skimming through https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/anti-bds-legislation, when house/senate vote numbers are mentioned, they overwhelmingly support anti-BDS laws, sometimes even unanimously, so it's not limited to just one party - not by a long shot.

How have so many states, including my own, pass something so obviously unconstitutional as well.

Lack of accountability pops into my mind. I'm not American but I'm absolutely shocked that this happened over there. Although as time goes on, that shock is becoming less common unfourtanetly.

In the article, they mention one of the first states to enact similar legislation is New York, not a state usually refered to as right wing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com