California Gov. Gavin Newsom took to the national press to explain/bolster/rationalize his proposal to follow Texas’ lead and outsource the enforcement of state laws on hot button issues to private individuals (wherever they may reside).

Setting aside the crucial question of whether such an approach is constitutional, or just so much political theater, Newsom dives in to say how his idea is awesome (and would never happen if not for the Supreme Court’s refusal to do what he wants on the Texas abortion law):

…unlike the Texas law, my proposal would not chill a constitutional right. No binding precedent has ever held that weapons of war or homemade “ghost guns” that evade basic regulation are constitutionally protected. Texas’s law, on the other hand, blatantly flouts Roe v. Wade’s fundamental protections.

Maybe California’s move will lead the court to change its mind about allowing Texas’s bounty-hunter scheme. If that’s the case, women’s reproductive care across our nation would be better off. If there’s anything I’ve learned as a father of four kids, it is that sometimes you don’t realize you’ve made a mistake until you see the consequences of your actions come true.

Or maybe Congress will respond to both laws — and also Florida’s recent proposal to allow private suits against those teaching “critical race theory” — by putting an end to this chaos and making it easier to challenge these laws up front, before suits filed under those laws result in thousands of dollars in damages. But if only radical conservative interests follow Texas’s playbook, we’ll never see change.

Let’s be clear: the Texas abortion law and Florida’s proposed CRT ban are ridiculous attempts to shield a state from accountability for its own laws.  That should be troubling to anyone who believes in the rule of law (something self-described conservatives once did with pride but are now too busy LARPing their way through life to care about).

That doesn’t make Newsom’s effort good or acceptable on any level. If he wants to make a point, do it in an op-ed, or, in keeping with the level of political discourse today, the playground.

Not through the machinery of the state.