Rhode Island-based U.S. District Court Judge Melissa DuBose presided Friday over the first hearing in Rep. Laurel Libby’s (R-Auburn) federal lawsuit against House Speaker Ryan Fecteau (D-Biddeford) over his decision to block the representative from voting and speaking on the floor of the Maine Legislature.
Libby was censured by a party-line vote in February for posting an image on social media that identified a biologically male athlete who took first place in a girls’ track and field contest, and which gained significant traction as it reached up to the highest levels of government and spurred a show-down between Maine Governor Janet Mills and U.S. President Donald Trump (R).
After Rep. Libby refused House leadership’s demand to apologize for the post — a condition of her censure — Speaker Fecteau stripped her of her right to vote and and participate in floor debates.
Libby still retains her right to sponsor legislation, present motions, engage in committee work, and testify at public hearings.
Concerns over the lack of representation for Libby’s 9,000 constituents have featured prominently in her case, as she is currently be prevented from partaking in two fundamental components of serving in the Legislature. A half dozen of her constituents join her as plaintiffs in her complaint against Fecteau.
[RELATED: House Dems Strips Laurel Libby’s Voting Rights Over Viral FB Post of Male Athlete Beating Girls]
Much of the debate during Friday’s hearing focused on the issue of legislative immunity — which guarantees that lawmakers have no liability for legislative acts under most circumstances — and its applicability in this case.
While Libby’s legal team argued that “it’s plainly not” constitutional to take away her right to speak and vote on the chamber floor, those representing Fecteau contended that members of House have a right to enforce the rules agreed upon by members of the body.
Arguing on behalf of Libby, attorney Patrick Strawbridge explained that while there is no First Amendment issue with her censure itself, one arose when her right to speak and vote were stripped of her after she refused to apologize for her post.
Although Libby agreed to the House rules, Strawbridge suggested that she didn’t agree to have them applied in a way that “punish[es] her constitutionally protected speech.”
Kimberly Patwardhan, Maine’s Assistant Attorney General, argued that Libby’s challenge only concerns protected legislative conduct that may not be challenged in court, suggesting that “even conduct that has a retaliatory motive is protected by legislative immunity.”
According to her analysis, refusing to recognize Libby during floor debates and not counting her votes on legislation are protected legislative acts.
She also argued that Libby does not have a First Amendment right to vote on any particular piece of legislation, citing a ruling from the U.S. Supreme Court.
Patwardhan further suggested during questioning that “better conduct” is expected from elected officials than is expected from members of the general public.
Adding to this, she pointed out that Libby was officially censured for “endangering a child” — which is against the House rules — not for her viewpoint on the issue of biological males participating in female sports.
Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Bolton argued during Friday’s hearing that Libby’s legal team is “conflating” the right of a citizen to participate in popular elections and the right of a legislator to participate in a floor vote.
Bolton suggested that while a floor vote is one of many ways that elected officials may further their constituents’ interests, voting in an election is the only mode of participation available to voters.
Consequently, he argued that a “reduction in privileges” does not equal “disenfranchisement.” Therefore, in his view, stripping Libby of her right to debate and vote does not amount of disenfranchisement as she has maintained her right to continue participating in other legislative activities.
[RELATED: Rep. Libby Files Federal Lawsuit Against Speaker Fecteau for Violating Her Constitutional Rights]
On rebuttal, Strawbridge provided “context” for the social media post that led to Libby’s censure in the first place, explaining that she was only reposting images and “factual information” about a public event, doing nothing to threaten or encourage threats against the minor in the photo, he said.
Strawbridge also noted that he was “stunned at the minimization” of Libby’s right to participate in the key legislative activities of voting and debating on the chamber floor.
He further pointed out that Libby’s constituents have no way of regaining their representation in Augusta, as she is still their elected official but has has been rendered unable to participate fully in the legislative process.
In conclusion, he suggested that the House’s decision to strip Libby of these abilities following her refusal to apologize represents a “massive extension of any prior attempt to censure somebody.”
Friday’s hearing marks the beginning of what is likely to be a long legal battle over the fallout from Libby’s February censure.
<span class="dsq-postid" data-dsqidentifier="37570 https://www.themainewire.com/?p=37570">13 Comments
I just started 3 weeks ago this web income system that my friend recommended to me and I’ve gotten 2 checks for a total of $9,200… this is the best decision I made in a long time! This extra v8751 cash has changed my life in so many ways, thank you!
Here is I started_______ tinyurl.com/homestar2?8753
My apologies to mainewire for thinking and commenting on another article that you didn’t cover this vital story. Idk why there’s no “delete comment” button here.
Perhaps add one??
@SARAH J
GO AWAY, PLEASE!!
Ryan “I’M NOT QUEER, MY BOYFRIEND IS” Facteau only did this to help out feckless governor Janet “SEE YOU IN COURT” Mills in hope of bolstering her stand against Trump for this state to allow mentally ill biological men to kick the crap out of women during athletic endeavors.
Maines democratic Reps are cowardly weasels, what the did to Libby in the floor of the Maine house was a disgrace! Not allowing her to speak or defend herself, actually shouting her down! Bad look for dem women reps! C’mon man!
The assistant AG’s argument that Libby’s constituent’s have not been harmed by her inability to vote is patently ridiculous. Does he understand what it means to be a representative republic??? Casting a vote in the election process does not allow your opinions to be heard and acted upon for policy and legislative matters.
And the judge that’s going to hear this case is also a queer lgbt woman .
These homosexual activist weirdos have infiltrated government everywhere around us and are twisting it to worship and appease these nut jobs .
Men CANT turn into women and women can’t change themselves into men . If YOU think otherwise you’re an idiot .
Message to Sarah J. GET A JOB. You’ll feel much better about yourself. Right now you’re suffering from depression.
I wonder if Mainewire will write about Obama crony Norm Eisen inviting Justice John Roberts to his 155 room mansion to work on law for Europe and USA 🇺🇸 from Mike Benz
I do not fell safe with my elected official being not able to speak for me.
How many of the Democrats who voted for censure are mandated reporters, either certified teachers, EMTs, medical professionals, etc? If they honestly believed that she “endangered” a child, each and every one of them is legally required to file a report with DHHS.
And anyone who has knowledge of a child being endangered should file with DHHS. And hence the question I ask is did anyone file?!? Did Herr Fecteau file?
And if posting the child’s photo is endangering the child, what did Fecteau do? Why isn’t he also being censored for the same offense? Why isn’t he being subjected to the same penalties?
Right….
In civil rights law, there is what is known as a “pretext” — some other reason why you did what you did. For example, “I didn’t fire her because she is a woman, I fired her because she can’t climb a ladder with a 94 lb bag of Portland cement under each arm.”
Well, can any of your *male* employees do that? Or do they carry them one at a time?
Unless they are going to honestly say that every time a legislator posts a newsworthy picture of a child constitutes endangerment, they can’t touch Libby for this.
And has anyone checked to make sure that no tranny friendly legislator didn’t post the exact same picture celebrating that championship? Or appear in any local newspaper with the child? It might be worth checking that out…
Porca miseria democratic Maine government. Libby stay strong. Your time is coming.
Maine woke up and vote red next time.
Tell me that there’s no corruption in that govern’mental’ body… now they will censure someone over posting a picture that a thousand people saw everywhere else… that’s just plain stupidity…what ‘s new in Maine?