Whenever a monument, plaque, or some other posting of the Ten Commandments is challenged as a violation of the separation of church and state, the government involved (local, state, or federal) usually defends them in court. These court battles can drag out for years and go through several levels of the judicial system - and, just as often, the government loses. It sounds like business as usual in a country where government officials try to give special consideration to Christians and Christianity, but just what is the cost of doing business?
According to federal law, lawyers who bring constitution-based lawsuits to change the government's behavior are allowed to request payment of their fees from the government if they win. Thus, taxpayers not only have to pay for the time and services of government lawyers, not to mention whatever resources they must use, but also the time and services of the lawyers of whatever organization or person brought the original lawsuit.
This is fair for the plaintiffs, because otherwise there would be very few constitutional challenges of government action unless there were some very large and wealthy organizations behind the effort. The government can almost always outspend any non-profit legal organization like the American Civil Liberties Union or the Southern Poverty Law Center. Thus, this federal law makes it possible for poorer people and smaller groups to make sure that government agencies live up to their ethical and constitutional obligations.
This does not change the fact, however, that there is the downside that when the government loses, taxpayers must pay. And how much? Well, the failed efforts of the Kentucky state government to re-erect a Ten Commandments monument on the Capitol grounds in Frankfort was very expensive: $121,524 paid to the American Civil Liberties Union of Kentucky for their legal costs, above and beyond what the state had to pay their own lawyers.
This is not the first time Kentucky has had to shell out large amounts of money in this manner. They also had to pay the ACLU $299,500 in 2001 and $277,000 in 1994 for costs from challenging laws restricting abortions. State Sen. Albert Robinson thinks that these costs are worth it, arguing that states like Kentucky should continue defending such laws and monuments until such a time as there are enough conservative judges who will rule in their favor.
It is worth wondering how the taxpayers of Kentucky feel about their state representatives and senators spending so much money on things like this instead of improving teacher salaries and medical care. Instead of paying, they might want to consider electing more responsible representatives. They should also perhaps be thankful that they don't live in Alabama, where matters are worse.
There, Alabama Supreme Court Chief Justice Roy Moore has lost his legal battles defending his massive Ten Commandments monument; as a result, lawyers for the Southern Poverty Law Center, the American Civil Liberties Union, and Americans United for Separation of Church and State have all filed requests that Moore's side pay $700,000 in fees. The eventual total could exceed one million dollars - and Alabama is already in a budget crisis.
Perhaps when governments are rich and without any need to be concerned about what they spend, it will be just fine for officials to expend large amounts of money in defending laws that are repeatedly struck down all over the country. Today, however, is not such a time - today governments at all levels have too little money for too many social obligations. Today there are budget crises all over and governments cannot really afford to defend unconstitutional laws, much less also pay to have them challenged.
As a consequence, it really appears as though elected officials like Senator Robinson are betraying the trust of the people who elected them. Even if those same citizens want things like Ten Commandments monuments to be defended, Robinson and others have an even more important duty than simply to follow along wherever the passions of the masses lead: they should be standing up for principles of wise and competent governance. That, in turn, means not wasting precious funds on the defense of the indefensible, no matter how popular it is with voters.
