Seriously Arizona Senate. WTF?

by Coleen Singer at Sssh.com Porn For Women

I love my home state of Arizona. 

I love every inch of its incredibly varied environment, from the lush Coconino National Forest to the sparsely beautiful Sonoran Desert. I love its wildlife, from the countless variety of birds and lizards to our black bears and bobcats. I even love its quirky, quais-libertarian “State’s Rights” stubbornness, because for some reason it appeals to the part of me that grew up attending punk shows and skipping classes to smoke low grade Mexican weed in the alleyway behind my high school.

The Arizona legislature, on the other hand…. not-so-loveable.

Whether they are busying themselves dreaming up completely unnecessary ‘emergency preparation’ legislation to address insanely unlikely and utterly overblown threats to our national security pulled straight from the plot of a Michael Bay movie, making our state the butt of late night talk show jokes by passing “birther” bills, or attempting to set back gay rights under the guise of “protecting religious freedoms,” over the years our legislature has secured a special place in my heart on my shit list.

Their latest failure, however, is hard to believe – even as someone who already has lost any modicum of faith she might once have had in the competence and professionalism of Arizona’s legislature.

Last week, after approving amendments to the state’s law prohibiting “revenge porn” – changes being made for the specific purpose of avoiding costly litigation to defend (likely in vain) the original statute in court – the Arizona Senate apparently decided to just blow the whole thing off and let the original statute take its lumps in court, after all.

Seriously…. W-T-F?  

Even by their own sorry ‘standards,’ this inexplicable, half-assed approach to governance on the part of Arizona’s state senate is beyond baffling.

The revised bill’s sponsor, J.D. Mesnard (R-Chanlder), firmly believes the changes he proposed would have satisfied the plaintiffs in the lawsuit challenging the statute, but those proposed changes are irrelevant now, thanks to the Senate’s thus far unexplained intransigence.

Lee Rowlands, the ACLU attorney heading up the lawsuit, said his legal team is now “evaluating our options.”

Mesnard, oddly, has opined the original law is legally defensible, and Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich has said “our office is prepared to defend the law.”

Sure it is “legally defensible,” J.D., and sure you are “prepared to defend the law,” Mark, but let’s just acknowledge “defensible” isn’t actually a synonym for “constitutional,” and note that every time the New York Knicks play the Golden State Warriors, I’m sure they are “prepared to defend” as well – but intent and outcome don’t always align perfectly in the final analysis, now do they?

Brnovich conceded he’d would prefer the law be amended before going to trial, and said he’d work with both sides of the dispute “in the hope that they can resolve ambiguities in the statute and avoid unnecessary litigation.”

Uh… just one small problem there, Mark: That’s what was supposed to be happening in the first place over the last several months, you disingenuous nincompoop!

Back when the two sides of the lawsuit agreed to suspend it pending amendments to the law by the legislature, the order issued by the court made it pretty damn clear why the court agreed the ‘stay’ was a good and worthy idea.

“The requested stay conserves judicial resources by relieving the Court of the burden of doing work that may ultimately be unnecessary if Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-1425 is modified in a manner which impacts or addresses the issues raised in this action,” stated the order, “while similarly sparing the parties from spending unnecessary time and expense continuing to litigate whether Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 13-1425 is constitutional, only for it to be modified in the upcoming legislative session.”

Yes, that does sound like a very good idea – too bad it called on the Arizona legislature to do something which makes actual fucking sense for once in its miserable existence.

How happy is Susan Bolton, the district court judge who signed this order back in early December, going to be to find herself right back at square one, five months later? Let’s put it this way: Mark Brnovich might want to consider attending this particular hearing wearing a flak jacket, because he’s sure as hell going to catch a bit of said flak.

Judges, by and large, are people who don’t appreciate it when you waste their time, particularly when you have wasted their time for no good reason. If I were Mark Brnovich, I’d do more than ‘work with’ both sides of the lawsuit; I’d get down on my wobbly governmental knees and BEG the plaintiffs to hold off on going back to court until I’ve had the chance to talk beat some sense into the assholes over at the state Senate who put me in this unenviable position.

As for me, I’m going to draw a hot bath, pour myself a big glass of wine, fire up my favorite documentary about the Grand Canyon…. and try to forget this state even has a legislature.

About Coleen Singer

Coleen Singer is a writer, photographer, film editor and all-around geeky gal at Sssh.com, where she often waxes eloquent about sex, porn, sex toys, censorship, the literary and pandering evils of Fifty Shades of Grey and other topics not likely to be found on the Pulitzer Prize shortlist. She is also the editor and curator of EroticScribes.com. When she is not doing all of the above, Singer is an amateur stock-car racer and enjoys modifying vintage 1970s cars for the racetrack. Oh, she also likes good sex and quality porn!