Sounds completely illegal to me. I am sure this idiocy will be challenged in Court.
It is one thing for a state to pass legislation that gives money to someone who cannot afford a bill. Still wrong but often fuzzy enough the courts allow it.
It is entirely different to require a private business to discriminate based on any reason, including economic, requiring that business to charge more for services between citizens.
I would think for starters the 14th would have a say but much more constitutionally would apply.
“I am sure this idiocy will be challenged in Court.”
How are elections and courts working out so far?
Of course it will be, but during the decades long worth of litigation the tyrant’s in black robes will allow the illegal scheme to become law until it isn’t. It’s called “Process Is Meaningful Punishment.” Or P-I-M-P for short.
Too bad the stupid party cannot figure that out or learn an even more insidious but effective warfare strategy…Alinsky’s 10 Step Rules for Radicals. That’s the communist’s equivalent to our Biblical 10 Commandments. And it works every time it’s tried.
While you’re researching Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals take a side trip and learn about the Cloward-Piven Strategy conceived in 1966 and is playing out as per the strategy today everywhere you look.
Until we learn these terrible strategies the dims practice, we are insured to be politically defeated every day and twice on Sunday, just think for a minute who’s winning with these strategies…had enough yet? I certainly have.