Posted on 04/06/2023 8:59:22 AM PDT by george76
Last term, in Carson v. Makin, the United States Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Maine could not prevent parents from using otherwise generally available state school choice funds at religious schools simply because those schools provided religious instruction. But the state is back at it again, discriminating against families and the religious schools they want to send their kids to.
Crosspoint Church, which operates the Christian school that two of the Carson plaintiffs attended, is suing Maine state officials in response to a law that, once again, tries to keep private religious (or “sectarian”) schools from receiving tuition assistance program funds, this time by adding an eligibility requirement that they must comply with the state’s LGBT anti-discrimination policy.
The Pine Tree State just can’t seem to take a hint.
Maine does not operate public schools in every town, particularly in rural far northern Maine, but students must still attend K-12 schools. That means that in many cases, religious schools are the only option available for families looking for a quality local education.
For the first 100 years of its tuition assistance program, the state allowed families and children to choose any school using tuition assistance dollars—whether the schools were public or private, religious or secular.
But in 1981, the state enacted a new restriction: Any school receiving tuition assistance payments had to be “nonsectarian,” having no “religious practice” involved. A school could be named after a patron saint of the Catholic Church, for example, but teachers could not celebrate those ideas or even add value-laden concepts into the school curriculum.
In separating schools that were religious in name only from schools that actually practiced religion, lawmakers thought they could keep “truly” religious schools from accessing publicly available funds.
The plaintiff families in Carson v. Makin argued that the state program’s “nonsectarian” requirement violated the U.S. Constitution by discriminating against religion, and last year, the Supreme Court agreed.
The court relied on its decisions in Trinity Lutheran Church of Columbia v. Comer (2017) and Espinoza v. Montana Department of Revenue (2020) to perform a straightforward resolution of the case. In Trinity Lutheran, the court held that Missouri could not discriminate against otherwise eligible recipients of public benefits because of their religion. And in Espinoza, the court held unconstitutional a provision of the Montana Constitution that barred aid to a school “controlled in whole or in part by any church, sect, or denomination.”
In Carson v. Makin, the Supreme Court determined that when private individuals use taxpayer funding to choose a religious K-12 school for their children, those individuals are not using public money to “establish” a religion—something that would be prohibited under the First Amendment to the Constitution. They’re simply making the best educational choice for their children.
Less than a year later, Maine education officials are back in federal court.
Following the Supreme Court’s decision in Carson, Maine Attorney General Aaron Frey released a statement saying he was “terribly disappointed and disheartened” by the outcome. What’s more, Frey stressed that religious schools were still ineligible for the tuition program because of their religious stance on sexuality and gender—positions that he called “fundamentally at odds with values we hold dear.”
Frey promised to explore with “members of the Legislature statutory amendments to address the Court’s decision and ensure that public money is not used to promote discrimination, intolerance, and bigotry.” It was clear that to keep discriminating against religious schools, the Maine Legislature would need to get creative.
The outcome of Frey’s promised “exploration” was a law requiring academic institutions participating in the state’s school choice program to adhere to the Maine Human Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation and gender identity.
Originally, all religious schools were exempt from the nondiscrimination provisions in the Human Rights Act to accommodate their religious beliefs. But in anticipation of Carson, the Maine Legislature narrowed the religious exemption in the Human Rights Act to protect only religious schools that do not participate in the tuition program.
Without an exemption from the LGBT discrimination provisions, religious schools can face investigations, complaints, and fines for teaching students in accordance with their sincerely held religious beliefs on sexual orientation and gender identity.
In its case on behalf of Crosspoint Church, public interest law firm First Liberty Institute calls the narrowed exemption a “poison pill” that deters religious schools from participating in the tuition assistance program and perpetuates the exact religious discrimination that the Supreme Court had already determined was unconstitutional.
In addition, the lawsuit points to a tweet by then-state House Speaker Ryan Fecteau in which he said that he’d “anticipated the ludicrous decision from the far-right [Supreme Court].” Fecteau stopped just shy of saying that in Maine’s search for ways to continue discriminating, they’d had a head start.
The law is on Crosspoint’s side. Not only has the Supreme Court already struck down the tuition program once for being unconstitutional, it has also clarified that a “government fails to act neutrally when it proceeds in a manner intolerant of religious beliefs or restricts practices because of their religious nature.”
The statements of government officials Frey and Fecteau are nothing if not intolerant.
Apparently, one lawsuit wasn’t enough to deter Maine from religious discrimination. Maybe this time, it will take the hint.
The State of Maine can simply get out of paying for education. Let the local school districts and private schools handle it.
Just like they used to.
Maine? Not at all surprising.
Interestingly, Jason Whitlock spoke to something similar to this on Tucker’s how last night. A woman who wanted to adopt two children in Oregon was denied the adoption when she refused, on religious grounds, to go along with the state’s requirement that agree to their “regendering” policies.
We can’t negotiate with people who think men can get pregnant . . .
Since it has filled up with rejects from Massachusetts and New York, Portland has become San Fran Sicko East. Not the place I knew in my youth in the '50s and '60s. I don't go there anymore, despite having extended family living in Falmouth.
Supreme Court decisions are only the law of the land, if they are liberal.
Can anyone cite an example where Maine or Oregon or any other blue state beating up “religion” has acted against a Muslim, or a Jew, or a Wiccan?
No. These laws target and are used solely against Christians, and violate the 1st because they establish a State religion of satanism — anything goes except Christ.
You will pay school taxes and receive nothing, Christians.
The koran says the next mahdi will not be born of a woman...
It gets worse by the day and can not wait to leave. It was a nice town for along time but the filth and settled here.
So they must comply with the STATES anti-discrimination policy while the state does NOT have to comply with anti-religious discrimination.
At bare minimum parents who do not use the state school system should not be required to pay school taxes
“fundamentally at odds with values we hold dear.”
Just how long have you held those values? 5-6 years?
Bttt.
5.56mm
The State of Maine can simply get out of paying for education. Let the local school districts and private schools handle it.
As noted in the article these students live in parts of Maine that have NO school distrct. In most cases they have no town to speak of.
Maine Attorney General Aaron Frey
See the attached link for an article on the above govt offical.
https://www.themainewire.com/2023/04/maine-ag-aaron-frey-caught-in-sex-scandal-error-in-judgement/
8-Month Long “Error in Judgement” – Maine AG Aaron Frey Caught in Sex Scandal
By Steve Robinson -April 5, 2023
Attorney General Aaron Frey admitted Wednesday to having a “personal relationship” with a subordinate employee at the Attorney General’s Office, according to a statement released by his office.
In the statement, Frey characterized his handling of the relationship, including not disclosing the relationship for more than seven months, as an “error in judgement.”
The statement was released to some news media outlets only after a reporter with the Bangor newspaper made inquiries based on tips.
The policy governing relationships between bosses and employees in state government requires disclosure of such relationships.
“Supervisors who become personally involved with a subordinate are required to report the relationship to their supervisors so that a change in reporting structure can be considered,” the policy states. It’s not immediately clear who Frey’s superior would be, since Maine’s Attorneys General are elected by the Legislature.
The other individual has not been identified.
In the statement, as reported Wednesday morning by WGME, Frey said:
“Beginning in August, I became involved in a personal relationship with a colleague in my office, whom I formerly supervised. While our relationship has not violated any legal rules, office policy or law, I have directed Chief Deputy Attorney General Christopher Taub to supervise this person moving forward as this personal relationship continues. This is to ensure that we have appropriate boundaries between us. I should have done this once we realized we had feelings for one another. It was an error in judgment and for that I am sorry.”
Frey said his office has now met all legal obligations required of an Attorney General who has a sexual relationship with a subordinate employee.
Gov. Janet Mills has yet to release a statement on the matter.
This is not the first time the sexual proclivities of a male Attorney General have caused a political problem for Mills.
In 2018, when she was running for her first term, Mills joined former New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman for a big-money fundraising event in New York.
Schneiderman later resigned after he was accused of sexual misconduct and physical abuse by four women.
Relationships like the one Frey has admitted to have come under closer scrutiny since the #MeToo movement of 2017-2018.
Although nothing reported about the relationship so far suggests it was anything other than consensual, liberal feminists have argued in the past that a power imbalance between a boss and a subordinate employee means it’s hard to establish true consent.
Only secular faith-based value-laden concepts (such as gender being based upon subjective feelings, and atheistic evolution) and can be allowed into the school curriculum.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.