Blue-state legislatures were hard at work this year quietly advancing far-left policies.
Blue state lawmakers in 2022 made it harder for law-abiding citizens to buy guns, and made it easier for illegal immigrants to get driver’s licenses.
They turned their states into refuges for women seeking abortions at any time in a pregnancy and for minors seeking gender-affirming surgeries without their parents’ consent.
They increased regulations on small businesses and made it harder for them to manage their staffs. They curtailed the free-speech rights of doctors and banned politically incorrect high-school mascots. In some cases, voters in blue states and blue cities weighed in, further empowering public-sector unions and giving the thumbs-up to massive new racial-justice initiatives.
The following are some of the most notable blue-state laws and ballot measures approved in 2022. Some of these laws are already in effect, some go into effect next year, and some are tied up in court.
California Silenced Doctors with Unapproved Opinions on Covid-19
It is now illegal in California for doctors to express minority opinions about Covid-19, or the effectiveness of masks and coronavirus vaccines.
Over the summer, California lawmakers passed Assembly Bill 2098, which prohibits the dissemination of “misinformation and disinformation related to Covid-19” or the “development, safety, and effectiveness” of Covid vaccines.
Unelected members of the state medical board will be responsible for determining what counts as “misinformation,” but the legislation identifies it as “false information that is contradicted by contemporary scientific consensus.” Scofflaws could face reprimands from the medical board for engaging in “unprofessional conduct.”
The law is already being challenged in federal court. “Doctors need the freedom to explore alternatives and share opinions that challenge the scientific consensus—that is inherent in the nature of the scientific enterprise,” Dr. Mark McDonald of Los Angeles, one of the plaintiffs in the case, said in a prepared statement. “California cannot insert itself into the physician-patient relationship to impose its views on doctors and end all debate on these important questions.”
Some States Made It Harder Buy and Carry Guns
Several blue states made it harder for law-abiding citizens to avail themselves of their Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms.
In New York, Democrats were upset that the Supreme Court shot down their state’s gun-control law requiring concealed-carry applicants to “demonstrate a special need.” They responded by passing a new, equally dubious law. S51001, signed by Governor Kathy Hochul in July, created a long list of “sensitive” locations where guns aren’t allowed, including churches, bars, parks, and Times Square. The law prohibits people from entering private property and businesses with concealed weapons unless they first get the okay from the property owner.
According to the law, New Yorkers applying for a concealed-carry permit have to go through 18 hours of training, submit four character references to the state, provide the state with a list of their social media accounts dating back the last three years, and go through an in-person interview to prove they have “good moral character.”
A federal judge blocked several provisions of the law in October.
Lawmakers in California, which already has more gun-control laws on the books than any other state, also decided they needed more. In July, Governor Gavin Newsom signed SB1327, which empowers California residents to sue anyone who makes, sells, transports, or distributes illegal “assault weapons” or “ghost guns” in the state. The law, with a minimum bounty of $10,000, was modeled after Texas’s pro-life Heartbeat Act. Critics have called it silly, and a political stunt that will erode the constitutional rights of the state’s citizens.
In November, voters in Oregon narrowly passed Ballot Measure 114, one of the strictest new gun control laws in the country. The law criminalizes the possession of magazines that can hold more than ten rounds of ammunition, and it requires anyone who wants to purchase a gun to pass a training course and to get a permit from local law enforcement. One problem: local law enforcement agencies say they don’t have the infrastructure or staff to process tens of thousands of new background checks.
After a series of legal challenges, a state circuit judge put the measure on hold in early December.
Massachusetts Approved Driver’s Licenses for Illegal Immigrants
Massachusetts Democrats overcame a veto from the Republican governor and a Republican-driven ballot initiative to allow the state to issue driver’s licenses to illegal immigrants.
In May, the state legislature passed the Work and Family Mobility Act, which would allow people in the country illegally to obtain a driver’s license if they can provide a foreign passport or consular identification document, as well as one other form of ID, to the Registry of Motor Vehicles. Proponents painted it as a safety measure, but Governor Charlie Baker vetoed it.
“I cannot sign this legislation because it requires the Registry of Motor Vehicles to issue state credentials to people without the ability to verify their identity. The Registry does not have the expertise or ability to verify the validity of many types of documents from other countries,” Baker wrote in his veto message, also suggesting it could lead to voter fraud.
The Democrat-controlled state House and Senate overrode Baker’s veto, so Republicans pushed a ballot initiative in an attempt to repeal it. In November, 53.7 percent of voters agreed to uphold the law. At least one leftwing city councilwoman in Boston has since suggested allowing illegal immigrants to vote.
Rhode Island also passed a law in 2022 allowing illegal immigrants to get driver’s licenses.
California Became a Refuge for Kids Seeking Trans Treatments
In a response to some states limiting or banning transgender medical procedures for minors, California Democrats voted in 2022 to make their state a refuge for kids seeking them.
Over the summer, lawmakers overwhelmingly approved Senate Bill 107, which supporters said was needed to protect patients and doctors from prosecution if they travel to California from states that don’t permit minors to undergo some trans-treatments, such as gender-affirming surgeries, cross-sex hormones, and puberty blockers. The law empowers California courts to take “temporary emergency jurisdiction” over children who come to the state for trans-treatments, even in cases where they are brought to the state illegally or against a parent’s wishes.
Opponents warned that the law would encourage runaways to come to California, and could lead to California courts asserting themselves in intrafamily dramas where one parent approves of a child’s transgender treatments and the other does not.
Colorado Passed One of the Nation’s Most Extreme Pro-Abortion Laws
Several blue states positioned themselves as havens for abortion in 2022, codifying the practice into law in anticipation of the Supreme Court’s decision to overturn Roe v. Wade.
In Colorado, Democratic lawmakers passed HB22-1279, the Reproductive Health Equity Act, one of the most extreme pro-abortion laws in the country. The law allows for abortion for any reason at any time in a pregnancy, and declares that in Colorado, “a fertilized egg, embryo, or fetus does not have independent or derivative rights.”
Colorado is now one of only a handful of states that have formally declared abortion a “fundamental right.”
Vermont Banned Offensive School Mascots
Lawmakers in Vermont finally found time to tackle one of the nation’s most pressing issues: politically-incorrect school mascots.
S.139 directs the Vermont Agency of Education to create a policy that prohibits the state’s public schools from having mascots based on the “race, creed, color, national origin, sexual orientation, or gender identity of any person or group of persons,” or “any person, group of persons, or organization associated with the repression of others.”
The law also directs the state education department to create a process for offended citizens to file mascot complaints with their local school boards. However, the boards’ decisions could be appealed to the state’s secretary of education, who would have the final say.
Problematic Vermont school mascots in recent years have included the Raiders, the Crusaders, and the Little Indians, according to a report from VTDigger.org. Democrats said the offending mascots have “caused heartache and pain for many,” and called the new law an “important continuation of Vermont’s work around equity and inclusion in our schools and in or broader communities.”
California Approved a Council to Micromanage Fast-Food Restaurants
California Democrats took aim at the state’s fast-food industry in 2022, passing a law that would allow for the creation of an unelected council to impose regulations on fast-food restaurants, including mandating a nearly 50 percent minimum wage increase.
AB 257, also known as the Fast Food Accountability and Standards Recovery Act, or the FAST Act, was narrowly approved by California Democrats over the summer and signed into law on Labor Day. It allows for the creation of a ten-member, unelected fast-food council that would have broad regulatory powers over any fast-food restaurants in California that are part of a chain with 100 or more locations. Under the law, the council would have the authority to mandate that fast-food restaurants increase their minimum wage from $15 to $22 next year.
Proponents of the law said it was necessary to curb wage theft and sexual harassment prevalent in the industry. But opponents of the law say there is little evidence the problems the law is allegedly designed to cure are worse in the fast-food industry than in others. Rather, they say the law was a power-play by the Service Employees International Union of California, which has struggled to organize fast-food workers in the state. The union could use its influence on the council as a bargaining lever with fast-food businesses statewide.
A coalition of business groups gathered more than a million signatures from voters in an effort to block the law’s implementation in 2023, and to put it on the general election ballot in 2024. On Thursday, the coalition filed a lawsuit to block the California Department of Industrial Relations from implementing the law while the signatures are being verified. “The DIR’s disregard for the rule of law is an insult to the democratic process,” Sean Kennedy, the National Restaurant Association’s executive vice president for public affairs, said while announcing the lawsuit.
Illinois Votes to Give More Power to Big Labor Bosses
In November, Illinois voters approved Amendment 1, a ballot initiative that will significantly increase the power of public-sector union bosses in the state.
Also known as the Workers’ Rights Amendment, it prohibits state lawmakers from passing right-to-work laws in Illinois, and it expands subjects eligible for union negotiations beyond wages and hours to include anything that impacts “economic welfare and safety at work.”
The law states that collective bargaining contracts “shall supersede any contrary statutes, charters, ordinances, rules or regulations relating to wages, hours and conditions of employment.” That means, union bosses can now void hundreds of state and local laws by simply writing contrary provisions into their contracts, according to the free-market Illinois Policy Institute.
Proponents of the amendment advertised it as offering protections for “all Illinoisans,” even though it only applies to public-sector workers, according to the Wall Street Journal. Opponents say it will lead to tax increases to pay for higher wages and more benefits for government workers. And it will likely snuff out efforts to reign in government waste and overlap in Illinois.
New York City Voters Okayed a Massive Racial-Equity Infrastructure
New York City voters overwhelming approved three ballot measures in November that will mandate the creation of a massive new racial-equity infrastructure in the city.
The three initiatives were proposed by leaders of the NYC Racial Justice Commission, who were appointed last year by then-mayor Bill de Blasio. The initiatives are intended to “put equity at the heart of our government” and to “form a seed whose roots will grow over time and knit together a new soil for an equitable society,” according to a commission report.
New York City will now add an introductory statement to its charter with an aspirational vision of a “just and equitable city for all,” and a declaration that “diversity is our strength.” The charter will be amended to establish an Office of Racial Equity that would be led by a chief equity officer, establish a racial-equity commission to identify priorities, and require that every city agency produce a racial-equity plan every two years. “Equity work [will] no longer be siloed, but rather developed out holistically across all agencies,” according to the report.
The city’s charter will also be amended to create a new measure of the “true cost of living” in the city. Opponents argued that the new measure will be used to justify increased government spending on social assistance programs.