Supreme Court restores Maine lawmaker's voting abilities following ban over Facebook post about trans athlete
A Maine Republican state lawmaker censured over a Facebook post knocking a transgender high school athlete cannot be barred from voting while her legal challenge plays out, the Supreme Court ruled Tuesday.
The unsigned order granted state Rep. Laurel Libby's request to restore her voting and speaking privileges – which were stripped in February by the Democratic-controlled Maine House of Representatives over her social media post.
Liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented, with Jackson arguing that the case did not require emergency intervention from the high court.
Advertisement
3 The Supreme Court blocked the Maine House of Representatives from barring Libby from voting and speaking in the chamber.
AP
'The First Circuit is moving quickly to evaluate the legal issues this case presents, with oral argument scheduled to occur in a few weeks,' Jackson wrote in her dissent.
'Meanwhile, before us, the applicants have not asserted that there are any significant legislative votes scheduled in the upcoming weeks; that there are any upcoming votes in which Libby's participation would impact the outcome; or that they will otherwise suffer any concrete, imminent, and significant harm while the lower court considers this matter,' she added.
Advertisement
Jackson further argued that the ruling would incentivize others to rush to the Supreme Court for emergency relief and that Libby 'failed to demonstrate' that her 'right to this relief is 'indisputably clear.''
Libby, who has served in the Maine statehouse since December 2020, was censured after she posted a photo of a high school transgender pole vaulter standing on the first-place step of a state championship podium.
'We've learned that just *ONE* year ago John was competing in boy's pole vault… that's when he had his 5th place finish,' Libby wrote in the Feb. 17 Facebook post. 'Tonight, 'Katie' won 1st place in the girls' Maine State Class B Championship.'
3 Libby refused to apologize for the Facebook post.
Representative Laurel Libby / Facebook
Advertisement
Maine's Democratic House Speaker Ryan Fecteau demanded that Libby apologize over the post as a condition of her censure, which she refused, leading to the voting and speaking ban.
'VICTORY!' Libby wrote on X Tuesday after the high court granted her petition for relief.
'The U.S. Supreme Court just restored the voice of 9,000 Mainers! After 2+ months of being silenced for speaking up for Maine girls, I can once again vote on behalf of the people of House District 90,' the state rep added. 'This is a win for free speech — and for the Constitution.'
3 Libby, a Republican, was censured by the Democratic-controlled state House of Representatives in February.
@laurel_libby/X
Advertisement
Democratic Maine Attorney General Aaron Frey, representing Fecteau, had argued that barring Libby from voting and participating in debates was a 'modest punishment' in line with statehouse rules.
'Rep. Libby has steadfastly refused to comply with this modest punishment, which is designed to restore the integrity and reputation of the body,' Frey's office wrote to the high court. 'Her refusal places her in breach of a centuries-old rule of the Maine House, Rule 401(11), that Rep. Libby previously agreed, along with all of her House colleagues, would govern House proceedings.'
'Rule 401(11) provides that a member found by the body to be in breach of its rules may not participate in floor debates or vote on matters before the full House until they have 'made satisfaction,' i.e., here, apologized for their breach.'
Libby had argued that the ban violated the 14th Amendment's guarantee of equal protection.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
USA Today
32 minutes ago
- USA Today
'Afraid' for court: Trump DOJ sues NY over immigration enforcement in state courthouses
'Afraid' for court: Trump DOJ sues NY over immigration enforcement in state courthouses Show Caption Hide Caption Three Democratic governors testify in House hearing over immigration New York Governor Kathy Hochul, Minnesota Governor Tim Walz, and Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, testify on Capitol Hill over immigration policies. NEW YORK − The Trump administration on June 12 sued New York state for its law restricting federal immigration enforcement inside state courthouses. The lawsuit challenges a New York state law that blocks immigration officials from arresting people at or near New York courthouses. The complaint, filed in federal court in Albany, New York, alleges the law frustrates federal immigration enforcement at a venue - state courthouses - where authorities can safely make arrests. U.S. Justice Department lawyers said New York's law and policies restricting cooperation with federal immigration officers violated the Constitution's Supremacy Clause, which gives federal law precedence over state law. The lawsuit filed in federal court in Albany comes after the administration has increased immigration enforcement at workplaces and while people appeared for immigration court hearings. People have protested against the federal actions in cities across the country. Attorney General Pam Bondi blamed so-called 'sanctuary city policies' for violence seen in California. Sanctuary policies generally refers to those limiting local law enforcement from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement. The Justice Department has also sued four New Jersey cities for their laws. New York state had similar policies preventing agents from apprehending migrants, Bondi said in a statement. 'This latest lawsuit in a series of sanctuary city litigation underscores the Department of Justice's commitment to keeping Americans safe and aggressively enforcing the law,' she said. Justice Department lawyers challenged the 2020 state law preventing federal officials from arresting people for civil immigration violations at state courthouses without a signed judicial warrant. New York's 2020 law doesn't apply to federal courthouses or immigration court, according to the legislation's author, state Sen. Brad Hoylman-Sigal, a Manhattan Democrat who called the lawsuit 'baseless and frivolous." The Justice Department said in a news release that enforcement at courthouses reduces risk of people fleeing or dangerous situations, especially since there is enhanced screening inside court buildings. 'Ongoing assault' on rule of law in NY, state officials say State officials said federal agents entering local courthouses make communities unsafe by preventing people from accessing the judicial system. The law ensures New Yorkers can pursue justice without fear, Geoff Burgan, a spokesperson for state Attorney General Letitia James, said in a statement. 'Due process means nothing if people are too afraid to appear in court,' he said. James would defend the law and 'all of New York's laws, just as she will continue to defend the rights and dignity of all who call New York home,' Burgan said. Hoylman-Sigal, who authored the law, said the lawsuit was part of the administration's 'ongoing assault on the rule of law in New York.' To avoid conflicting with federal law or federal immigration authority, the law doesn't apply to federal courts or immigration courts, he said in a statement. Meanwhile, it allows U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement to arrest people in local courthouses when they have 'actual, valid judicial warrants.' 'At a time when masked ICE officials are roaming the state and lawlessly detaining New Yorkers without any due process, the law preserves access to justice and participation in the judicial process,' he said. 'Sensitive' areas targets of immigration enforcement A contentious issue has been federal agents targeting people in 'sensitive" areas. Prior Department of Homeland Security guidelines banned enforcement in areas such as schools, places of worship and hospitals. When President Donald Trump took office in January, DHS overturned the longstanding policy to give agents discretion on such actions. The administration enacted another policy permitting enforcement at or near courthouses. Justice Department lawyers also challenged two New York executive orders restricting civil immigration arrests at state facilities, and a separate policy preventing state employees from sharing information to federal officers related to civil immigration enforcement. 'Through these enactments, New York obstructs federal law enforcement and facilitates the evasion of federal law by dangerous criminals, notwithstanding federal agents' statutory mandate to detain and remove illegal aliens,' the complaint said. The same day as the lawsuit, Gov. Kathy Hochul was one of three Democratic governors testifying before Congress about "sanctuary" policies and immigration enforcement. Hochul said her state has cooperated with ICE since she's taken office. "But we have to draw a line somewhere,' Hochul said. 'New York cannot deputize our state officers to enforce civil immigration violations, such as overstaying a visa.' The administration's attack on the 2020 law would turn courthouses 'into traps,' Donna Liberman, executive director of the New York Civil Liberties Union, said in a statement. It would further force immigrant communities into the shadows. An initial conference date for the lawsuit was scheduled for Sept. 10, court records showed. Contributing: Bart Jansen, USA TODAY Eduardo Cuevas is based in New York City. Reach him by email at emcuevas1@ or on Signal at emcuevas.01.
Miami Herald
33 minutes ago
- Miami Herald
‘Leave Immediately': Trump administration orders self-deportation for Biden-era parolees
The Trump administration is telling Cubans, Haitians, Nicaraguans, and Venezuelans that legally came to the United States under a Biden-era program that they must immediately leave the United States and encouraging them to self-deport. The Department of Homeland Security said on Thursday that it is notifying parole recipients of a program known as CNHV that if they 'have not obtained lawful status to remain in the U.S., they must leave immediately.' The agency said it is also revoking their work permits. 'Ending the CHNV parole programs, as well as the paroles of those who exploited it, will be a necessary return to common-sense policies, a return to public safety, and a return to America First,' said Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin. The development comes 13 days after the Supreme Court lifted a lower court's order blocking the Trump administration from ending the program. During the Biden presidency, over half-a-million people from the four countries legally came to live and work in the U.S. READ MORE: Trump targets Biden-era migrants from Cuba, Nicaragua, Venezuela and Haiti for deportation As many as half of the 531,000 migrants who entered the United States through the program have applied for other immigration benefits to adjust their status and may have a path to remain in the country, according to the Justice Action Center, a nonprofit that advocates for immigrants and has defended the parole program in court. This includes individuals who have already applied for asylum or for a green card under the decades-old Cuban Adjustment Act. However, as many as hundreds of thousands of others now face a difficult decision: whether to remain in the U.S. — risking detention and deportation — or to voluntarily return to countries plagued by violence, hunger, and human rights abuses. The Supreme Court ruling did not offer guidance for the Trump administration on how to carry out the ending of the program. Brandon Galli-Graves, Staff Attorney at Justice Action Center, said that the organization does not know how DHS will conduct immigration enforcement toward beneficiaries of the program. He noted that the agency previously said it intended to put as many beneficiaries as possible in expedited proceedings, a type of administrative deportation process that does not require a judge. When the Trump administration ended the program, roughly 117,000 Venezuelans, 211,000 Haitians, 110,000 Cubans, and about 93,000 Nicaraguans had entered the country through the program. It remains unclear whether all parole beneficiaries will receive the deportation notice or only those who have not applied for any other legal status. Galli-Graves said beneficiaries should check with their lawyers to understand how the Supreme Court case affects them. In its statement, the Trump administration referred to parole recipients as 'illegal aliens., ' despite the fact that, to qualify for the program, individuals were required to have a financial sponsor in the U.S., pass health and background checks, and enter the country through an airport. Once admitted, they became eligible to apply for work permits valid for the program's two-year duration. Many CHNV parolees were employed in critical sectors of the U.S. economy, from construction to elder care, helping to address labor shortages in both rural and urban areas, according to several immigration advocates. With parole protections now terminated, many of these individuals face job loss, housing instability, and disruptions to their education. The mass termination also jeopardizes family reunification as thousands of U.S.-based sponsors, including faith communities and cherished family members, now find themselves unable to protect the loved ones they committed to support. 'Rescinding legal protections from hundreds of thousands of people who entered this country through proper channels is a deeply destabilizing decision, not just for the families affected, but also for their loved ones and the communities that have welcomed them,' said Krish O'Mara Vignarajah, President and CEO of Global Refuge. 'These are people who play by the rules.. Tearing up that social contract overnight does nothing to advance our national security or humanitarian leadership.'
Yahoo
34 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US senator dragged out of LA immigration news conference
Democratic US Senator Alex Padilla has been forcibly removed from a news conference held by Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem in Los Angeles. Noem was offering the latest figures on immigration enforcement in the area, which has led to nearly a week of protests in the city, to members of the news media when Sen Padilla interrupted and started shouting a question. Once removed from the room, the California senator was handcuffed. Padilla's removal caused condemnation on both sides of the aisle, with fellow senators calling the arrest shocking and a "sickening disgrace" and the Trump administration dubbing it "disrespectful political theatre". "I'm Senator Alex Padilla," he said as he was confronted by authorities. "I have questions for the secretary!" Noem, who was speaking about immigration and the protests in LA, continued addressing reporters and law enforcement officers while the senator was ejected from the room. Padilla's office said he was "forced to the ground and handcuffed" by federal agents when trying to ask the secretary a question, and added that he was not currently being detained. The Department of Homeland Security said Padilla had engaged in "disrespectful political theatre" and that Noem met with the senator after the news briefing. LA Mayor Karen Bass called the incident "absolutely abhorrent and outrageous", adding that the Trump administration's "violent attacks on our city must end". Padilla told reporters that he was already in the federal building for a previously scheduled meeting. He said he stopped by Noem's news briefing because he and his colleagues have received "little to no information in response" to several immigration-related queries. Padilla, the son of Mexican immigrants, is the most senior Democrat on the Senate's Border Security and Immigration subcommittee. "I came to the press conference to hear what she had to say, to see if I could learn any new additional information," he said. "If this is how the Department of Homeland Security responds to a senator with a question, you can only imagine what they're doing to farm workers, to cooks, to day labourers out in the Los Angeles community and throughout California and throughout the country." He urged Americans across the country to "continue peacefully protesting" the Trump administration and its policies. The DHS in a statement said Padilla didn't identify himself and was not wearing the Senator's pin on his clothing so officers thought he was an attacker. Video footage of the incident shows Padilla saying he was he was a senator as he was being pushed outside the room. California's Governor Gavin Newsom called on Republican congressional leadership to condemn the detaining of Padilla. "If they can handcuff a U.S. Senator for asking a question, imagine what they will do to you," Newsom wrote on social media. But the White House accused the California senator of storming the press conference, and said he "yelled and lunged toward Secretary Noem". "Padilla didn't want answers; he wanted attention," Abigail Jackson, White House spokesperson said. "Padilla embarrassed himself and his constituents with this immature, theater-kid stunt – but it's telling that Democrats are more riled up about Padilla than they are about the violent riots and assaults on law enforcement in LA." Former vice-president and Trump opponent, Kamala Harris also criticised the move and said the California senator was trying to get answers for his constituents about the ongoing immigration raids in the state. "United States Senator Alex Padilla was representing the millions of Californians who are demanding answers to this Administration's actions in Southern California," she said on Twitter. "This is a shameful and stunning abuse of power."
