California bans state-sponsored travel to Alabama, 7 other states
24648 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
777 / The White House
Offline
Posted 6/23/17 , edited 6/24/17
So travel bans between states is OK in California but if we try to implement a travel ban against states that sponsor/train terrorists its suddenly an issue?! I'm wondering if this is even legal... I think this is stupid and childish personally, what do you think?



http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/06/california_bans_travel_to_alab.html

California's Attorney General said the state is pulling the plug on state-sponsored travel to Alabama and three other places - Kentucky, South Dakota and Texas. The addition brings the total number of states included in California's travel ban to eight, with Kansas, Mississippi, North Carolina and Tennessee placed on the off-limits list earlier this year.

While the economic implications of the travel ban are unclear, its most immediate impact could come this fall on the football field.

First, what's is California's travel ban?

California's law, AB 1887, went into effect Jan. 1, 2017. It prohibits state-funded and state-sponsored travel to states with laws that authorize or require discrimination based on sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression or same-sex couples.

What does it cover?

The travel ban law prohibits state-funded travel for those working at California agencies, departments boards, authorities and commissions including those associated with the University of California, the Board of Regents of the University of California, and the California State University.

The law puts the responsibility for deciding what states are added to the travel ban on California Attorney General Xavier Becerra.


.....
http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/06/california_bans_travel_to_alab.html

38308 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
33 / M
Offline
Posted 6/24/17 , edited 6/24/17
I think this is a clickbait title paired with a misguided rant.

This is nothing like, and has nothing to do with, Trump's travel ban.

It is preventing California taxpayer money from reimbursing travel to certain states, and state employees shouldn't be tasked with travelling to them (there are exceptions for those who can't avoid it as part of their duties). It has absolutely no impact on where anyone can or can't choose to go on their own time and dime.
36376 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / U.S.
Offline
Posted 6/24/17 , edited 6/24/17
The quoted text indicates the state of California will no longer be sponsoring travel to certain other states. That really doesn't seem like a ban to me. It's much more of a political statement.
2066 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
31 / M / Sacramento, CA
Offline
Posted 6/24/17 , edited 6/24/17
Dude, can you even read?
51656 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
37 / M
Offline
Posted 6/24/17 , edited 6/24/17
Why read when you can just assume something completely supports whatever opinion you want?
qwueri 
26190 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
32 / M / TN
Offline
Posted 6/24/17 , edited 6/24/17
Clickbait titles strike again. If this were from CNN I'd expect cries of "Fake new!"
9736 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
18 / F / London, England
Offline
Posted 6/24/17 , edited 6/24/17
Lol. I fell for that click bait title.
runec 
42282 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 6/24/17 , edited 6/24/17

lorreen wrote:
Not sure if it was deliberately left out in order to be more clickbaity, or if OP honestly doesn't understand or believe that part is relevant.







121583 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
F / Boston-ish
Offline
Posted 6/24/17 , edited 6/24/17

iriomote wrote:

I think this is a clickbait title paired with a misguided rant.


I've added "state-sponsored" to the title. Not sure if it was deliberately left out in order to be more clickbaity, or if OP honestly doesn't understand or believe that part is relevant.

24648 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
777 / The White House
Offline
Posted 6/24/17 , edited 6/24/17

lorreen wrote:


iriomote wrote:

I think this is a clickbait title paired with a misguided rant.


I've added "state-sponsored" to the title. Not sure if it was deliberately left out in order to be more clickbaity, or if OP honestly doesn't understand or believe that part is relevant.



Or I just copied the original article's title because it seemed fine to me since the article went into depth about it.
29745 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
29 / M
Offline
Posted 6/24/17 , edited 6/24/17
Despite having Hollywood and Silicon Valley they somehow manage to be insolvent, they probably can't afford the plane tickets. :/
12147 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
21 / M / Winnipeg, MB.
Offline
Posted 6/24/17 , edited 6/24/17

octorockandroll wrote:

Another day another thread where Rujikin misrepresents simple information to fit his agenda.


You must be logged in to post.