Texas vs. New York and $100,000 To Change the Constitution

The Brewing Legal Battle to Redefine How States Play in the Constitutional Sandbox

Welcome back to our crash course in the U.S. Constitution — everything you need to know to better debate those aunts and uncles of yours on Facebook, without the law school price or the weird professors. Each issue tackles a different big idea that’s shaped American life: free speech, due process, equal protection, search and seizure, etc.. Expect real-world examples, understandable explanations, and the occasional lawyer joke (now you’ve been warned, so you can’t be upset). Whether you're a news junkie, a student, or just someone who wants to finally understand what “strict scrutiny” actually means, you’ll leave each issue a little smarter — and way more equipped to fight mistruths. The law was meant to be understood by the people. This series is here to prove it.

Today’s issue: Texas vs. New York and $100,000 To Change the Constitution: The Brewing Legal Battle to Redefine How States Play in the Constitutional Sandbox

Previous issue: This Part of the Constitution is Holding the Country Together Right Now (Barely)

Next issue: It’s My Right…But Is It? The Privileges and Immunities Clause

---

The Moment We’re In Right Now

We’re in no shortage of modern events calling into question our historical precedent (or lack thereof) on issues that make us go — is that constitutional? But while many of those are happening front and center in the news, there’s another legal battle brewing in Texas that’s largely flown under the radar, primarily because so many other things have taken its place. In February, a judge in Texas issued a default judgement (an order when the defendant doesn’t show up) against a doctor in New York for prescribing abortion medication to a Dallas woman. That act would be unlawful in Texas. In New York, it’s entirely lawful. Texas is arguing that under the Full Faith and Credit Clause (today’s lesson), New York must respect the Texas judgement and enforce it. But New York also has a ‘shield law’ in place, which is designed to protect New Yorkers from this exact thing. Texas doesn’t like that. And they think it should be held invalid.

And if you’re wondering why cases like this haven’t come up before…they have. But now we’re in a different situation. Texas is probably thinking that the massive sea change in abortion law opens the door to challenging the Full Faith and Credit Clause.

So who’s right? Let’s talk about it.

---

Part 1: Where This All Started: A Country of Ghosted Commitments