Yes, but do you want to bet that the Republican SCOTUS won’t find that the founders clearly intended to allow this to happen to brown people, or simply sit on it until 2030?

▲

AnimalMuppet 2 days ago | parent [-]

The people affected are not all brown people, so even if I held that low a view of the Supreme Court, no I would not bet on that.

Sitting on it until 2030? Well... it won't be the Supreme Court sitting on it until 2030. It will be:

- You can't go to court (usually) on a hypothetical. You usually need someone who has been actually affected. That can't happen until the law actually takes effect (September).

- Then you need a court case, in federal court (probably, since it's a first amendment argument). That has to reach completion, which can take a year or three.

- Then you need an appeal to the district court, and for that appeal to be accepted, and for that court case to run to completion. I have less of a feel for how long that takes, but I would guess at least half a year, maybe longer.

- Then you need an appeal to the Supreme Court, and for it to be accepted, and for the Supreme Court to hear the case and decide. That can take a year.

So, yeah, you're not going to see a final resolution until 2030 or so. That's not because the Supreme Court is sitting on it, though - at least, not most of it.

▲

hn_acker 2 days ago | parent [-]

> You can't go to court (usually) on a hypothetical. You usually need someone who has been actually affected. That can't happen until the law actually takes effect (September).

I think a Texas college or a student of one could bring a facial challenge to this law before it goes into effect. The following two excerpts of S.B. 2972 [1] (the second one consisting of spliced fragments) should be enough to demonstrate that the law would inevitably, not hypothetically, restrict a student's freedom of speech:

> "Expressive activities" means any speech or expressive conduct protected by the First Amendment to the United States Constitution or by Section 8, Article I, Texas Constitution

`Each institution of higher education shall adopt a policy detailing... rights and responsibilities regarding expressive activities at the institution. The policy must... prohibit... engaging in expressive activities on campus between the hours of 10 p.m. and 8 a.m.`

[1] https://legiscan.com/TX/text/SB2972/2025

	▲	AnimalMuppet 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Oh, I agree that it's blatantly unconstitutional. I'm just not sure that a court will accept a facial challenge. Once someone's been arrested, though, a court is going to have a hard time turning it away. In the ideal world, there would be a facial challenge and a temporary restraining order on implementation of the law, pending the challenge being finally decided. I'm just not sure that it will happen that way (or that quickly).