16 attorneys normal led by Tennessee’s AG Jonathan Skrmetti have penned a stern letter geared toward Maine’s Democratic management, denouncing a progressive invoice that they are saying might ignite a nationwide “culture war.”
The invoice in query, LD 227, seeks to enshrine the correct to abortions, transgender surgical procedures, and hormonal remedies in Maine, drawing fierce criticism from these attorneys normal, stating it infringes upon the Structure.
The attorneys normal, all Republicans, despatched their letter to Maine Governor Janet Mills, Lawyer Common Aaron Frey, and the state legislature’s management on Monday.
They argue that the invoice is an unprecedented and “novel effort at state-sanctioned culture war litigation tourism,” which might have critical constitutional implications.
LD 227 provides authorized safety to these touring to Maine to entry medical procedures that could be banned or closely restricted of their house states.
Nevertheless, the Republican attorneys normal contend that the invoice doesn’t simply present a authorized defend for healthcare suppliers and sufferers towards out-of-state legal guidelines but additionally paves the best way for Maine to impose its regulatory will on different states.
They declare that LD 227 would enable for Maine to create a non-public proper of motion for damages towards legislation enforcement and officers in different states who’re merely upholding their very own legal guidelines.
The letter emphasizes that the Structure’s Full Religion and Credit score Clause and the federalist construction of the U.S. stop one state from interfering with the legislative processes or legislation enforcement of one other. They categorical concern that LD 227 might set a harmful precedent, doubtlessly resulting in states imposing liabilities on people or officers in different states for a variety of coverage disagreements.
Learn the total letter beneath:
We, the undersigned Attorneys Common, write to precise critical concern concerning LD 227, a invoice pending within the Maine Legislature. Whereas this can be very uncommon for States to interject themselves into one other State’s lawmaking, LD 227s distinctive constitutional transgressions benefit our remark.
LD 227 seeks to contravene the lawful coverage selections of our States’ residents by imposing on the remainder of the nation Maine’s views on hotly debated points akin to gender transition surgical procedures for kids.
The legislation’s far-reaching provisions are unprecedented. LD 227 not solely purports to defend from legal responsibility these providing or aiding the supply of illegal providers to residents situated in our States a provision Deliberate Parenthood asserts would “safeguard” Maine suppliers and sufferers from “out-of-state laws that ban or restrict care that is legal in Maine.”!
The legislation additionally creates a non-public proper of motion for damages towards legislation enforcement, prosecutors, and different officers in our States who’re imposing our personal legitimate state legal guidelines, even legal guidelines whose constitutionality has been confirmed by federal appellate courts. On prime of that, LD227 purports to dam legitimate orders and judgments from our state courts imposing legal guidelines upheld by federal appellate courts.
As at the moment drafted, LD 227 violates america Structure and flouts the federalist construction that permits every of our States to interact in self-government attentive to the need of our residents.
The Structure’s Full Religion and Credit score Clause, and federal statutes implementing it, imply no state reason behind motion ought to ever accrue from a distinct State lawfully imposing its personal permissible legal guidelines or executing legitimate judgments. E.g., Baker by Thomas, 522 U.S. at 240 (1998).
LD 227’s non-public proper of motion likewise runs headlong into well-settled authorized ideas like comity, jurisdiction, and the rule towards States’ discriminatory and extraterritorial regulation of commerce. The federal Structure, in brief, precludes Maine’s novel effort at state-sanctioned tradition battle litigation tourism.
From a sensible perspective, LD 227s ill-considered try and affect and intimidate officers in different States might additionally set off a speedy tit-for-tat escalation that tears aside our Republic.
One might simply envision a First Modification Safety Act that creates state legislation legal responsibility for individuals, even individuals out of state, who search to suppress purported hate speech, or a Second Modification Safety Act that creates legal responsibility for many who search to control firearms, or legal guidelines that impose harsh penalties on individuals who categorical assist for one aspect or one other within the battle between Israel and Hamas.
If one State doesn’t like one other State’s regulatory regime with respect to automobiles, or meals, or alcohol distribution, or no matter else, it might create a tenuous jurisdictional hook to permit the identical kind of extraterritorial bullying tried by LD 227. State officers could be dragged into authorized battles in far-flung jurisdictions, thwarting their potential to give attention to defending their very own residents in keeping with their very own duly-enacted legal guidelines.
In America, we’ve got the correct to disagree. Maine has each proper to resolve what Maine’s legal guidelines are and the way these legal guidelines ought to be enforced. However that very same proper applies to each State. One State can not management one other.
The totalitarian impulse to stifle dissent and oppress dissenters has no place in our shared America. We won’t enable legal guidelines like LD 227 to discourage us from defending the integrity of our States’ democratic processes. If Maine pursues LD 227’s constitutionally faulty method, we’ll vigorously avail ourselves of each recourse our Structure supplies.
