Newsollini's Laws

Gavin wants California to stop working with Walgreen's?  Not so fast:

Gov. Gavin Newsom declared in March that California was “done” doing business with Walgreens after the pharmacy chain said it would not distribute an abortion pill in 21 states where Republicans threatened legal action. Since then, KHN has learned that the Democratic governor must compromise on his hard-line tweet.

California is legally bound to continue doing business with Walgreens through the state’s massive Medicaid program, health law experts said. And according to a public records request, the state paid Walgreens $1.5 billion last year.

Newsom’s administration confirmed it will “continue to comply” with federal law by paying Walgreens through Medi-Cal, which provides health coverage to roughly 15 million residents with low incomes and disabilities. Were California to stop covering Medi-Cal prescriptions filled at Walgreens stores, legal scholars warned, the state would run afoul of federal law, which allows patients to get their medications at any approved pharmacy...

Newsom spokesperson Anthony York said, “Tweeting is not policy.” He added the governor will not “take any action that hurts people who need access to care.”  

Not unless he can get away with it, anyway.

Even a newspaper editorial board wishes he'd quit trying to burnish his liberal bona fides and, if he's going to sign gun control legislation, it ought at least to be constitutional:

The San Diego Union-Tribune Editorial Board believes the Second Amendment is a fact of American life, and we lack the legal expertise to judge the points made by the high court’s conservatives. But we also believe the Second Amendment was written more than 230 years ago , at a time of muskets and long rifles , not the modern weapons involved in the horrible mass shootings seen today. We believe the Second Amendment can coexist alongside responsible gun legislation, so that every American can expect to survive in public and private spaces.

It’s obvious that two-thirds of the Supreme Court draws a different line than we might. As a result, we urge Newsom and the Legislature to renew their efforts to reduce gun violence but to do so by thinking more fully through their legal obstacles. They must craft laws that can survive the high court — not pass measures that amount to little more than value statements or thoughts and prayers.

The man wants to be president.  He views the governor's office as his personal ticket to the White House rather than a public service platform for executing the laws.  He's a menace to limited, constitutional government.