Opinion | Maine’s End Run Around the Supreme Court Is an Example for Other States

What every week thus far for conservatives. On Tuesday, the Supreme Court struck down a Maine legislation that prohibited spiritual non-public faculties from receiving taxpayer {dollars}. And on Thursday, it invalidated a New York State gun security legislation limiting the public carry of firearms. The final result in these instances was not shocking. The court docket has dominated in favor of spiritual litigants in an overwhelming variety of instances, and the gun case’s final result was clear from the oral argument earlier than the justices in November.

What is shocking is how little the 6-to-3 resolution in the Maine case, Carson v. Makin, will matter virtually. And the motive provides a glimpse of hope for those that fear a few future dominated by the court docket’s conservative supermajority — together with the many Americans troubled by the court docket’s resolution in the gun case, New York State Rifle and Pistol Association v. Bruen.

Let’s begin with the Carson case. Anticipating this week’s resolution, Maine lawmakers enacted an important modification to the state’s anti-discrimination legislation final year with a view to counteract the anticipated ruling. The revised legislation forbids discrimination based mostly on gender identity and sexual orientation, and it applies to every private school that chooses to simply accept public funds, with out regard to non secular affiliation.

The affect was speedy: The two spiritual faculties at situation in the Carson case, Bangor Christian Schools and Temple Academy, stated that they might decline state funds if, as Maine’s new legislation requires, accepting such funds would require them to change how they operate or alter their “admissions standards” to confess L.G.B.T.Q. college students.

The legislative repair crafted by Maine lawmakers provides a mannequin for lawmakers elsewhere who’re alarmed by the court docket’s aggressive swing to the proper. Maine’s instance reveals that these on the dropping finish of a case can usually outmaneuver the court docket and avoid the consequences of a ruling.

By enacting its legislation, Maine was in a position to guarantee its taxpayers that they won’t be complicit in discriminating towards L.G.B.T.Q. college students, as a result of non-public faculties that discriminate shall be ineligible for public funds. The legislation will restrict church-state entanglement, assuming different spiritual faculties decline funding for the similar causes as the faculties in Carson. And though nondiscriminatory non-public faculties can nonetheless obtain public funds, Maine can eradicate that program at any level — a truth the court docket conceded. (Whether it ought to is a more in-depth question that must activate the program’s impact on educational equity.)

Other states ought to comply with Maine’s lead. A handful of blue states — together with Illinois, Maryland, Nevada and Vermont — present vouchers or similar tax-credit scholarships to low-income college students to enroll in non-public faculties. None of them, nevertheless, enacted a statute prohibiting funds-receiving non-public faculties from discriminating towards L.G.B.T.Q. college students. Legislation that may achieve this is pending in Maryland’s legislature, the General Assembly. Lawmakers there ought to shortly enact it. Other states also needs to prohibit such discrimination.

And lawmakers troubled by the court docket’s gun security resolution and fearful about the looming ruling on abortion also needs to take a web page from Maine’s playbook.

Now that the court docket has struck down New York’s limits on who might carry weapons in public, state lawmakers there and in different states ought to cross new legal guidelines to discourage gun violence. Justice Clarence Thomas’s majority opinion made clear that the constitutionality of restrictions is traditionally “settled” in “sensitive places” reminiscent of legislatures, courtrooms and polling places, and that “modern regulations” might “prohibit” the carry of firearms in “new” locations. Given that, states ought to enact an expansive record of so-called delicate locations the place weapons is probably not carried. Though Justice Thomas didn’t specify which these could be, throughout oral arguments in November, a number of justices contemplated that they could embrace public transportation, crowded venues, university campuses and locations the place alcohol is served.

Justice Brett Kavanaugh famous in a concurrence joined by Chief Justice John Roberts, furthermore, that whereas states might not impose restrictions that forestall “ordinary, law abiding citizens” from carrying a gun to defend themselves, states can nonetheless enact rigorous necessities for a public carry allow, reminiscent of stringent background and psychological well being information checks and completion of normal coaching programs.

Another promising reform for states to contemplate could be to require gun homeowners to own firearm liability insurance. Not solely would such a requirement make sure that victims of gun violence can get better for their losses and “provide financial incentives for responsible arms carrying,” but it surely additionally attracts robust historic help from a number of nineteenth century “surety laws” recognized in the court’s opinion.

We’re nonetheless awaiting the court docket’s abortion resolution in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization. If Justice Samuel Alito’s leaked draft opinion overruling Rode v. Wade turns into legislation, states that help abortion rights ought to reply with each means at their disposal. Lawmakers ought to act vigorously to make sure that abortion suppliers are in a position to serve out-of-state sufferers unable to acquire care of their residence states. At the nationwide degree, the Biden administration ought to argue that Food and Drug Administration guidelines allowing the use of mifepristone to terminate a being pregnant override opposite state legal guidelines. Congress also needs to proceed working to enact the Women’s Health Protection Act to enshrine a proper to abortion as a matter of federal legislation, despite the fact that the filibuster stays an impediment.

Last fall, Justice Sonia Sotomayor, for whom I clerked in 2013-2014, predicted that there could be “a lot of disappointment in the law” in the present court docket time period. We are actually seeing why. For comprehensible causes, some critics of the present court docket have girded for a battle to broaden the variety of justices. Maine has proven one other promising path. Sometimes, the finest solution to defend towards overreaching by the conservative court docket is thru good old style lawmaking.

Aaron Tang (@AaronTangRegulation) is a legislation professor at the University of California, Davis, and a former legislation clerk to Justice Sonia Sotomayor.

Back to top button