Latest news with #MaineConstitution
Boston Globe
29-05-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Maine judiciary clash: Lawmakers seek probe into judge ethics process
But the legislators' options appeared limited. Chief Justice Valerie Stanfill had previously testified that any legislative branch efforts to change the judicial branch's internal processes would violate the Maine Constitution's separation of powers clause. Advertisement 'The judicial power vested in the Supreme Judicial Court includes the exclusive authority to regulate the conduct of judges of all the courts, including imposing discipline or misconduct,' Stanfill wrote in her testimony opposing the bill. The legislative committee ultimately endorsed an amended version of the bill that would convene a group to study the court's process, despite being told by a judicial representative the legislature had no power to enact any changes the committee might recommend. The conflict between the two branches of government stems from Advertisement A January 2024 ethics complaint from attorney Thomas Cox had argued that the justice's decision not to recuse herself from two cases involving Maine foreclosure law was unethical because of her previous work representing banks in foreclosure cases. In one of those cases, , she argued for the bank, but the Court disagreed and decided against her, establishing a new precedent favorable to Maine homeowners. A few years later, a new court with Connors on the bench heard arguments in a similar case, Pushard . Connors the justice had helped overturn a precedent created in a case that Connors the attorney had lost, sparking outrage from some lawmakers and members of the bar who thought she should have recused herself from the case. Connors has defended her conduct, and pointed out that she sought advice from a judicial advisory panel, which advised her that recusal was not necessary. The Committee for Judicial Conduct evaluated the complaint and made an initial recommendation that Connors should be disciplined in October, clarifying in a December filing that the discipline should consist of a public reprimand. The power to mete out judicial discipline lies with the high court. Connors' case raised questions about what happens if a justice is the subject of a complaint, as well as about the potential conflict in tasking Supreme Court justices with deciding whether or not to discipline a colleague. In January, the Maine Supreme Court drafted new rules for how to handle the unprecedented complaint against Connors. The draft rules put the authority for evaluating complaints against Supreme Court justices in the hands of a panel of lower court judges. Advertisement But the rules have not been implemented, the Connors matter has not been closed and no timeline has been given for when it could be resolved. 'It looks like this matter is being swept under the rug,' Cox testified to the judiciary committee. Rep. Adam Lee (D-Auburn), who introduced the legislation, looked to neighboring Massachusetts for its system of evaluating allegations against Supreme Court Justices. Their process involves a similar process of creating a panel of lower court judges to evaluate misconduct by a member of the high court. Last week, Lee and the legislative committee seemed poised to amend the bill to avoid the constitutional issues raised by Stanfill. Instead of implementing a new system, they discussed creating a legislative study group to examine Maine's process for disciplining judges and justices. Judicial spokesperson Barbara Cardone reiterated her boss's position to the committee. 'What you're about to undertake is an unconstitutional exercise of legislative power,' Cardone said. 'I don't know how many of you understand how rare it is for the chief justice to speak out at a public hearing regarding the constitutionality of a bill. It's somewhat upsetting that that declaration, that advice, seems to go unheeded by members of this committee.' Some lawmakers pushed back, asking how it could be unconstitutional to form a legislative study committee. Cardone argued it was pointless to form a committee to study an issue the legislature had no say in. Advertisement 'If the legislature does not have that power, why would the legislature convene a study commission?' Cardone said. 'I guess that's the question that you all need to answer.' Cardone noted that the Court had received public comment on the proposed rules, and would soon be issuing another draft of the rules based on the feedback it had received. But she could not say when those rules would be made public, or what changes they contained. She said the rules would be different enough from the first draft that there would be another public comment period, and encouraged lawmakers to submit comments. Rep. Lee was defiant as he made a motion to advance the amended bill calling for a study group. 'The Maine Supreme Judicial Court is indeed the ultimate arbiter of the constitutionality of things, but they do so through cases and controversies, not through testimony to the judiciary committee,' he said. The committee voted to advance the bill by a margin of ten to three.
Yahoo
09-04-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Bill would offer more accurate data on number of homes built in Maine
Apr. 9—When state officials issued a report in late 2023 saying that Maine needed to build 84,000 new homes over the following seven years to accommodate its current and future population, housing advocates knew it would be difficult to accurately track progress toward that goal. That's because Maine, like most states, doesn't have a uniform system to collect home production data that's already available in many city and town offices. Instead, MaineHousing and other agencies rely on construction estimates based on data that some municipalities provide voluntarily to the U.S. Census Bureau. LD 1184 would take some of the guesswork out of fixing Maine's housing crisis by requiring municipalities to report annual home construction data — including building, demolition and occupancy permits — to the Maine Department of Economic and Community Development. The data would be overseen and organized into an online portal by the department's Housing Opportunity Program, which promotes residential development that's affordable to low- and moderate-income Mainers. In gathering more accurate housing data, Maine would become the second state in the nation to tackle its housing crisis in a more accountable way. Connecticut began closely tracking home construction and demolition data in recent years. LD 1184 would allow Maine to "manage and measure" its progress in promoting home construction, said Rep. Traci Gere, D-Kennebunkport, the bill's primary sponsor, testifying Tuesday before the Legislature's housing committee. Currently, Maine estimates home production at the state and county levels based on building permit data submitted voluntarily to the Census Bureau, said Hilary Gove, a Housing Opportunity Program coordinator. Because it's voluntary, many Maine municipalities don't collect or report building permit data to the bureau, resulting in data gaps, Gove told the committee. "Relying on this building permit data is not an exact measure of housing production because not all reported building permits for housing units result in completed housing units," Gove said. "By requiring municipalities to collect and report (comprehensive housing data) on an annual basis, we will have a more precise picture of housing production from year to year." Committee member Rep. Amanda Collamore, R-Pittsfield, questioned whether reporting housing data would be mandatory, which would require the bill to get two-thirds House approval, a requirement outlined in the Maine Constitution. Collamore also questioned whether smaller towns would have a difficult time complying with limited staffing and budgets and whether municipalities would be penalized if they didn't participate. Gere said the bill doesn't call for penalties, the reporting form would be designed to not be "burdensome," and sponsors were open to making compliance optional — which prompted committee member Rep. Mark Walker, R-Naples, to question whether optional reporting would diminish the purpose of the legislation. Eamonn Dundon, advocacy director for the Portland Regional Chamber of Commerce, spoke in favor of the bill, noting the need for accurate home construction data and the success of a pilot program conducted by the Greater Portland Council of Governments. Kristina Egan, executive director of GPCOG, said the pilot program drew voluntary compliance from 26 of 29 communities in Cumberland County and tallied nearly 1,600 new homes in the region in 2024. Moreover, municipal staff who provided housing data said it took one to two hours to fill out the online form. The pilot revealed significant discrepancies in census-based home construction estimates, according to a GPCOG report. While the regional census estimated that 1,392 homes were built in the region last year, the municipalities counted 1,568 homes — an 11% increase, or 176 additional homes. Looking at data for individual communities, the census estimated that 47 homes were built in Cape Elizabeth, while the town counted only 16 homes — a 194% difference, or 31 fewer homes. And the census estimated that three homes were built in Yarmouth, while the town counted 13 homes — a 77% difference, or 10 additional homes. Gove, the state Housing Opportunity Program coordinator, suggested a few bill amendments, including the addition of a yearly deadline of Jan. 31 to submit data. Copy the Story Link
Yahoo
12-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Maine Legislature weighs constitutional right to hunt and fish
'Very little unites Mainers as much as the rich tradition of hunting and fishing,' said Maine Rep. Elizabeth Caruso of Caratunk. (Photo credit: USFWS/Ryan Hagarty) When Rep. Elizabeth Caruso saw a map of states with a constitutionally protected right to hunt and fish, she was shocked that Maine wasn't on it. That inspired the Republican from Caratunk to introduce LD 820 to establish that right in the Maine Constitution. Even though the state boasts a constitutionally enshrined right to food, which includes some hunting, Caruso said there can never be enough protection for heritage traditions that contribute to the livelihood and economy of many communities throughout the state. 'Very little unites Mainers as much as the rich tradition of hunting and fishing,' she said. 'If you want to protect your childhood memories, family heritage and the Maine hunting and fishing legacy that we leave to our children, I ask you to vote 'ought to pass,'' she encouraged members of the Legislature's Inland Fisheries and Wildlife Committee during a public hearing Wednesday. This amendment, however, would maintain the state's Sunday hunting ban. Committee members raised questions about the specific language in the bill, especially around the terms 'traditional' and 'reasonable.' Caruso said she was trying to use broad and inclusive terms, but is open to workshopping it. There were also questions about whether this sort of amendment is needed, given the right to food. The Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife opposed the bill over similar language concerns. Deputy Commissioner Tim Peabody said the department expressed those concerns with Caruso and would like to see this done right, but believes the proposal isn't there yet. The department took a more neutral stance on previous attempts to pass this sort of amendment, Peabody said. However, he noted that there has been progress on this topic in recent years, in particular the 2024 Maine Supreme Judicial Court ruling that found the state's right to food includes limited rights to hunting. The department views that ruling as a win, Peabody said. 'Having the constitutional amendment in there is one thing, but having the Maine supreme court rule on the right to hunt is very strong for our department,' he said. 'We see that as much stronger than having an untested constitutional amendment in there.' Peabody was referring to the 2022 lawsuit filed by Virginia and Joel Parker, that argued the state's Sunday hunting ban was unconstitutional after the passage of the right to food amendment. The ruling from the state's highest court found that the Sunday ban does not violate the right to food because it falls under the poaching exception in the amendment. The Sportsman's Alliance of Maine also highlighted that ruling as its reason to support Caruso's proposal, arguing that it would clarify language and prevent future challenges, according to written testimony from Executive Director David Trahan. The right to hunt amendment is a legislative priority for the National Rifle Association, said state director Justin Davis. Both the Maine Forest Products Council and Maine Woodland Owners testified neither for nor against the bill because while they support hunting and fishing, they also raised concerns about the bill language and fear it could create confusion with the already established right to food. Humane World for Animals, an animal rights organization, opposed the bill. Constitutional amendments in Maine have high bars for passage. This bill will have to secure the support of two-thirds of the Legislature and would then be sent to the voters, who would ultimately decide. The Legislature is considering a variety of other potential amendments including an Equal Rights Amendment and one to provide for parental rights. Unless noted in the legislation, constitutional amendments passed this session would go on the November 2025 ballot. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Yahoo
12-02-2025
- Yahoo
Group suing Maine's Catholic Church asks high court to reconsider statute of limitations ruling
Feb. 11—A group of people suing Maine's Catholic Church has asked the state's highest court to reconsider a ruling that bars them from bringing decades-old claims of childhood sexual abuse. The Maine Supreme Judicial Court last month shot down a 2021 law that let survivors file any lawsuits alleging child sexual abuse, even if their claims had expired under previous statute of limitations. The majority opinion had little to do with the allegations at the heart of the cases and was instead a hardline stance against the Legislature's effort to revive time-barred claims. After state lawmakers agreed let anyone sue in civil court for childhood sexual abuse, dozens of claims targeted the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland, alleging its leaders knew about the abuse and failed to prevent it or warn parishioners about allegations. The diocese challenged the law a year later. Some of the allegations dated as far back as the 1950s, and involved priests and other church employees who were already found to be credibly accused. Most have died. Lawyers for the plaintiffs said Tuesday that the justices didn't fully analyze the question they were asked to consider and are asking the court to revisit the case. "The Majority in Dupuis concluded that the right to be free from expired claims is a vested right arising from and protected by Maine's Constitution. Appellees do not dispute that issue here," attorneys wrote. "But whether and how much any right may be impaired must be determined by applying a due process analysis under the Maine Constitution." A spokesperson for attorneys Michael Bigos and Timothy Kenlan said they are declining to comment "out of respect for the Law Court." An attorney and a spokesperson for the Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland did not immediately respond to emails Tuesday evening. The diocese has previously claimed it had a "vested right" in the protections it enjoyed under Maine's previous statute of limitations. Without those protections, the diocese is open to potentially millions in damages. And it's not just the diocese. In the last three years, previously expired claims have been filed against the YMCA of Bangor, the Special Olympics, Camp Kieve and a counselor from the 1970s. This story will be updated. Copy the Story Link
