Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/18pdf/17-1717_4f14.pdf
Page Number: 46.0

Cite as:  588 U. S. ____ (2019) 

5 

KAVANAUGH, J., concurring 

equally  American,  no  matter  what  religion  they  are,  or  if 
they have no religion at all. 
  The conclusion that the cross does not violate the Estab-
lishment Clause does not necessarily mean that those who 
object  to  it  have  no  other  recourse.    The  Court’s  ruling 
allows the State to maintain the cross on public land.  The 
Court’s  ruling  does  not  require  the  State  to  maintain  the 
cross  on  public  land.    The  Maryland  Legislature  could 
enact new laws requiring removal of the cross or transfer 
of the land.  The Maryland Governor or other state or local 
executive  officers  may  have  authority  to  do  so  under  cur-
rent Maryland law.  And if not, the legislature could enact 
new  laws  to  authorize  such  executive  action.    The  Mary-
land  Constitution,  as  interpreted  by  the  Maryland  Court 
of  Appeals,  may  speak  to  this  question.    And  if  not,  the 
people of Maryland can amend the State Constitution. 
  Those  alternative  avenues  of  relief  illustrate  a  funda-
mental feature of our constitutional structure: This Court 
is  not  the  only  guardian  of  individual  rights  in  America.  
This  Court  fiercely  protects  the  individual  rights  secured 
by  the  U.  S.  Constitution.    See,  e.g.,  West  Virginia  Bd.  of 
Ed. v. Barnette, 319 U. S. 624 (1943); Wisconsin v. Yoder, 
406 U. S. 205 (1972).  But the Constitution sets a floor for 
the  protection  of  individual  rights.    The  constitutional 
floor  is  sturdy  and  often  high,  but  it  is  a  floor.    Other 
federal,  state,  and  local  government  entities  generally 
possess authority to safeguard individual rights above and 
beyond  the  rights  secured  by  the  U.  S.  Constitution.    See 
generally  J.  Sutton,  51  Imperfect  Solutions  (2018);  Bren-
nan,  State  Constitutions  and  the  Protection  of  Individual 
Rights, 90 Harv. L. Rev. 489 (1977).