A leading newspaper in Massachusetts has published a Freedom From Religion Foundation op-ed about a problematic proposed state commission that would favor a certain religion.
“Massachusetts state Sens. Jamie Eldridge and Vanna Howard have co-sponsored S 2134, which would establish a permanent state commission devoted specifically to American Muslims,” FFRF Regional Government Affairs Manager Mickey Dollens writes in the Salem News. “It would, among other things, ‘identify and recommend qualified American Muslims for appointive positions at all levels of government, including boards and commissions.’ Eldridge and Howard say that their legislation would establish a commission ‘focused on studying issues affecting American Muslim communities.’”
Unfortunately, as Dollens elaborates, the seemingly well-intentioned bill is hiding a grave constitutional issue:
One of the most concerning provisions is that the commission would be specifically directed to “identify and recommend qualified American Muslims for appointive positions at all levels of government, including boards and commissions.”
Why should religion have anything to do with that process? Article VI of the U.S. Constitution explicitly bars any religious test or qualification for public office? It was a carefully debated, first-of-its-kind prohibition that was one of the Founders’ proudest achievements.
There are several other provisions that go far beyond addressing discrimination. The commission would “foster unity among the American Muslim community and organizations in the commonwealth,” promote cooperation and joint activities among Muslim organizations, and “serve as a liaison between government and private interest groups” on issues concerning American Muslims. It would also advise executive and legislative bodies on proposed legislation affecting American Muslims.
That’s likewise a violation of the First Amendment’s Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses, which bar state/religion entanglements or interference. It’s also a direct violation of the Massachusetts Constitution, which bars any “use of public money or property … for the purpose of founding, maintaining or aiding any church, religious denomination or society.” (Article VIII, Section 2)
Also, state officials would appoint its 11 members, who must have “demonstrated a commitment to the Muslim American community.” What exactly qualifies as “commitment” to the Muslim American community? That’s not defined.
That phrase raises another question. What exactly does it mean, for purposes of a state commission, to “practice Islam”? Islam has different denominations, traditions and interpretations. Why should a state-sanctioned commission determine who “practices” a religion and who qualifies? That’s a direct violation of the First Amendment.
Massachusetts lawmakers should address anti-Muslim discrimination. However, equal protection does not require special government treatment for one faith. Some people point out that Massachusetts has commissions serving Black, Latino, Asian American, LGBTQ and disabled communities. But those are not religions. Massachusetts’ own Declaration of Rights already specifically protects equality among religious sects and denominations, which Muslims deserve every bit as much as Christians, Jews, Hindus, atheists and everyone else.
The bill’s appointment provision is also a problem. Massachusetts, properly, does not publicly track the religious affiliations of its appointees, and supporters of the bill have not shown that Muslims are underrepresented in public appointments. But even if they are, a government commission promoting a religious test is not the answer.
The bill’s authors say they are willing to make changes before refiling the legislation. Good. Here’s a place to start: Remove the unconstitutional provision recommending Muslims for government appointments, get rid of the unconstitutional mandate to foster unity among Muslim organizations and rethink whether Massachusetts needs a permanent government commission built around one religion in the first place.
The piece concludes by urging lawmakers to focus efforts on ensuring that all residents have a safe state to call home, regardless of their beliefs or lack thereof: “Massachusetts can and should fight anti-Muslim bigotry and make sure Muslim residents enjoy the same civil rights and opportunities as everyone else. The Bay State doesn’t need a Department of Religious Representation. It needs a government that protects people of every faith and no faith under the same laws.”
The full op-ed can be read here (a subscription to the Salem News is required).
This column is part of FFRF’s initiative to engage with pertinent national and state issues and spread the messages of secularism and freethought to a broader audience.
The Freedom From Religion Foundation is a national nonprofit organization with over 40,000 members nationwide, including more than 800 members in Massachusetts. FFRF’s purposes are to protect the constitutional principle of separation between church and state, and to educate the public on matters relating to nontheism.
