The BDN Editorial Board operates independently from the newsroom, and does not set policies or contribute to reporting or editing articles elsewhere in the newspaper or on bangordailynews.com.
One of the beautiful things about America is that everyone has a right to their own beliefs, even the ugly beliefs.
The Constitution is supposed to protect everyone equally, regardless of ideology. Those protections apply even to the most disgusting views, like the hate inherent in Nazism. The same protections allow us to express our disgust freely.
Ultimately, freedom is meaningless if it is only extended to the people with whom we, or the government, agree.
So after a neo-Nazi drew statewide attention for his abandoned attempt to establish a training facility in Springfield, and as Maine lawmakers have considered a bill to ban unauthorized paramilitary training, we have consistently highlighted the importance of focusing on actions, not beliefs. Ugly words, disgusting beliefs and the choice to associate with people who espouse them are constitutionally protected. The same is not necessarily true when it comes to actions that impact others, when hateful beliefs become hateful activities that target other Mainers and Americans.
It bears repeating: Weapons training can help people better prepare to protect themselves and their communities. But when such training is done with the intent to cause civil disorder, it by definition becomes a threat to the community. LD 2130, recently ( and narrowly) passed by lawmakers, would ban the latter type of training while continuing to allow the former.
After Democratic Rep. Laurie Osher of Orono submitted this bill to ban unauthorized paramilitary training, groups like the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of Maine and others raised concerns and made suggestions about how to amend the bill with constitutional protections in mind. Language around intent was improved and penalties were reduced. The resulting legislation, after much deliberation and adjustment to address the thoughtful concerns, has achieved the needed balance of targeting dangerous actions while continuing to protect individual liberties.
Anyone, whether they are a member of the neo-Nazi group Blood Tribe or the militia group Rise of the Moors, has a constitutional right to their beliefs. But the Constitution does not shield them from accountability when their actions cause disorder in society.
Despite what some opponents have argued, we are confident that LD 2130 as amended is appropriately centered around actions, not beliefs.
All that remains is for Gov. Janet Mills to sign the bill, and she should. Like the Legislature, she should carefully review the legislation and its implications. We believe that after such a review, the governor and all Mainers can be confident that this bill is a measured, balanced and needed response to strengthen Maine’s existing anti-militia laws.
The situation in Springfield highlighted the need to strengthen those laws, as more than half the country already has. But the need goes beyond one particular training facility or one particular ideology.
As Greater Bangor Area Branch NAACP President Michael Alpert wrote in a letter to the Bangor Daily News last year, this issue really speaks to a basic role of government.
“Protecting the public from violence is a basic obligation of government,” Alpert wrote in an August letter responding to news about the Springfield facility. “Current Maine statutes might not be adequate to control the threat posed by an organized hate group’s armed militia. Our laws and regulations must be reviewed and, where appropriate, strengthened.”
Lawmakers have found an appropriate way to do just that with this bill. It should become law with the governor’s signature.
