Hacker News Reader

Maybe Texas ought to just host the site themselves if it means so much to them. GoDaddy, AWS and DigitalOcean have no obligation to host your site if they object to the contents of your site, that's been inside the EULA of every VPS distributor since 2005.

View on HN

I haven’t read any detailed piece on the SCOTUS decision, but I think a big part in why the law is allowed to go ahead for now is that it is:

- a civil statute, not criminal

- reported/enforced by private individuals/entities, not the state government

I suspect the law was crafted specifically to deny the possibility for the government to operate such a site, and that this was the “one weird trick” used to get around the Roe precedent, at least for 5 of the justices. I’m not totally confident in that, so I’d appreciate learning if I’m wrong.

Well, it sure is too bad that this law meant to bypass constitutional precedent by relying on private individuals to act as DAs might be slightly hampered by other private individuals denying them the use of their platform for this purpose.

To be clear, I’m massively against the new law. I was just explaining that my understanding is that for its proponents, a workaround such as hosting with the state government wouldn’t work because the legislators are hoist with their own petard.

It is not a government website.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com