A decision by the U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) on Tuesday in favor of state Rep. Laurel Libby (R-Auburn) that restored for voting rights in the Maine House raises some question about the legal clout of Maine Attorney General Aaron Frey, who argued the nation’s highest court shouldn’t review the censured lawmaker’s case.
AG Frey made headlines at home in Maine earlier this month by filing an amicus curiae brief to SCOTUS asking them deny Rep. Libby’s request for an injunction against Maine Speaker of the House Ryan Fecteau’s censure order issued earlier this year in reaction to the fallout over the contents of a viral social media post.
After refusing to apologize for her post in accordance with the terms of her censure, Libby was stripped her right to both speak and vote on the House floor.
“Like other censures of Maine House members, the censure resolution required Rep. Libby to apologize for her conduct — not recant her views. Rep. Libby has steadfastly refused to comply with this modest punishment, which is designed to restore the integrity and reputation of the body,” Frey wrote.
On Tuesday, America’s highest court ruled in support of Libby, reinstating her right to vote on the floor of the House as her case continues to wind its way through the legal process.
Frey has signed onto a number of nationwide lawsuits in recent years, also submitting a number of amicus briefs defending one side or another in nationally important controversies, for the most part challenging the policies of President Donald Trump’s (R) administration.
On January 21 of this year, Frey filed a lawsuit against the Trump Administration for the president’s executive order ending birthright citizenship, alleging that it was in violation of the Constitution.
This case was heard by the Supreme Court earlier this month, at which point Justices appeared somewhat divided over how the lower courts should have handled this case.
“It was anticipated that the President would issue this unconstitutional block on citizenship, but that does not make it any less disappointing,” said Frey. “The election did not change the Constitution and legal action is required to remind the President that his oath is to uphold that sacred document, not rewrite it.”
Frey has also joined a lawsuit on behalf of the State of Maine over the Trump Administration allowing Elon Musk and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to have allegedly improper access Americans’ private information and sensitive data.
“In violation of clearly established law, President Trump has granted Elon Musk and an unknown group of associates a green light to blow through statutory confidentiality protections for personal identifying information held by the federal government,” Frey wrote in support of that effort.
“This unlawful access to confidential information by an unelected billionaire and his anonymous team has not only raised significant concern and anxiety by those whose information may be compromised,” he argued at the time, “but it also is just another demonstration of the complete disregard for the rule of law by this presidential administration – and we are not even through week three.”
In a 148-page memorandum issued by U.S. District Judge Ellen Hollander in April, it was explained that “the issue here is not the work that DOGE or the Agency want to do,” but rather “how they want to do the work.”
“To be sure, rooting out possible fraud, waste, and mismanagement in the SSA is in the public interest,” Judge Hollander wrote, referencing DOGE’s stated aims. “But, that does not mean that the government can flout the law to do so.”
Frey has also joined lawsuits challenging the Trump Administration’s decision to cut “indirect cost” reimbursements to research institutions, as well as to freeze other funding streams for federal agency grants, loans, and other financial assistance programs.
Within 24 hours of the lawsuit concerning the standardized 15 percent reimbursement rate, a federal judge out of Boston issued a temporary restraining order blocking the Administration from enforcing its policy in the 22 states involved in the suit, including Maine. A decision in a separate case, however, prevented enforcement of these caps across the board.
In March, Judge John J. McConnell of the U.S. District Court for the District of Rhode Island ruled against the Trump Administration in the lawsuit pertaining to federal funding freezes, declaring that these streams needed to be restored immediately.
Late last year, Frey also sued fossil fuel energy companies — including Exxon, Shell, Chevron, BP, Sunoco, and the American Petroleum Institute — for allegedly “deceiving Mainers for decades about the role of their fossil fuel products in causing climate change.”
A bill seeking to require Frey to drop this lawsuit has been introduced in the Legislature, but following a vote Tuesday, it appears that the bill is on a path for rejection. Consequently, Frey is likely to have the authority to continue pursuing this case.
[RELATED: Maine AG Aaron Frey, Facing Far Left Challenger, Files Symbolic Suit Against Energy Companies]
In response to Frey’s seemingly frequent involvement in lawsuits on behalf of the State, lawmakers introduced a bill earlier this year aiming to give final say to the Legislature on which civil suits are brought by the Attorney General’s Office.
LD 1008, sponsored by Rep. William R. Tuell (R-East Machias), would direct the Judiciary Committee to consider any case that the Attorney General has proposed to bring on behalf of the State and to submit a recommendation to the full chamber on whether or not it should be given the green light.
Lawmakers in the House and Senate would then be able to approve the lawsuit by a majority vote.
This legislation also would establish a procedure for Maine citizens to require the Attorney General to drop a particular lawsuit once it has been brought.
[RELATED: Lawmakers Looking to Have the Final Say on What Lawsuits the Maine Attorney General Can Bring]
Citizens would have the ability to file an application for a petition with the Secretary of State’s Office, at which point the Attorney General would need to file a motion to stay proceedings until the petition process is completed.
Mainers would than have one year to collect 500 signatures. If successful, the Attorney General would be required to dismiss the lawsuit in question.
Since Judiciary Committee lawmakers are divided over whether or not this proposal should ultimately be passed, it will be up to legislators on the chamber floor to decide this bill’s fate.
Click Here for More Information on LD 1008
While pursuing numerous national causes, Maine’s attorney general seems less willing to address the serious concerns raised by a recent review of the state’s spending practices by the legislative-appointed Auditor Matthew Dunlap (D), who raised questions regarding as much as $2.1 billion worth of contracting — often without competitive bidding or adequate justifications.
Disappointed by Frey’s unwillingness to investigate these and other concerns, Maine legislative Republicans wrote to U.S. Attorney General Pam Bondi asking that the federal government do so.
To date, Frey’s office has also taken no action on troubling reports of systematic abuse of the MaineCare reported last by The Maine Wire. Some legislators have proposed changing the way Maine chooses its top prosecutor by making the office directly elected rather than appointed and confirmed by the often partisan legislature.
