The Maine State Legislature’s Judiciary Committee held an over seven-hour public hearing on two “restorative justice” style bills: one to allow the automatic sealing of some criminal records and one to re-institute parole.
LD 1911
The committee began by hearing testimony on LD 1911 put forward by Sen. Rachel Talbot Ross (D-Portland). The bill would allow for the automatic sealing of criminal records for a variety of crimes, including drug offenses, if certain conditions are met, such as having no pending charges.
“An old arrest or conviction record can be an albatross around people’s necks. Individuals who have paid their debt to society should not continue to be penalized,” said Sen. Talbot Ross in her presentation.
Ross testified in favor of an amended version of the bill, which excluded additional crimes from automatic sealing and increased some waiting periods before a record can be sealed in certain cases.
Rep. David Boyer (R-Poland), the bill’s only Republican co-sponsor, also testified in support of the legislation.
“Victimless crimes generally speaking, those, those lower class crimes they should be be sealed. Cannabis, obviously, I’m partial too. I worked on the campaign to make that legal, and the idea that there’s hundreds if not, I think, thousands of folks with, you know, those convictions still on their records doesn’t make sense,” said Rep. Boyer.
Cumberland District Attorney Jackie Sartoris, an advocate for “restorative justice” policies that prioritize rehabilitation over retribution and often result in light penalties for criminals, also voiced her support for the bill.
“Please carefully consider adopting the clean slate act here in Maine. Let people move forward after a reasonable time, after paying their debt to society, so I can focus on my job of truth telling and accountability, not hidden lifetime collateral consequences,” she said.
The vast majority of testimonies, both written and in person, were in support of the bill, although some spoke out against it.
Judy Meyer, representing the Maine Press Association, voiced her organization’s opposition to the bill, raising First Amendment concerns and citing a prior court ruling suggesting that the automatic sealing of criminal records could violate the Constitution.
“There are decades of case law, including in the First Circuit, on First Amendment guarantees that the public has a right to court records and court proceedings. There are centuries of common-law as well, upholding the same thing,” said Meyer.
She urged for further study before the bill is passed into law.
Khristina Lunner, Deputy Commissioner of Maine’s Department of Professional and Financial Regulation, also opposed the bill on behalf of the state body.
“It would significantly impair the ability of department agencies and affiliated boards to conduct meaningful criminal background checks on individuals seeking licensure or renewal,” said Lunner.
The Maine State Chamber of Commerce submitted written testimony against the bill, raising concerns that it could impact workplace safety and put employers at risk by preventing them from accessing important background information.
“It does not consider the circumstances of the offense, the nature of the job, or potential risks. Employers would lose access to relevant information while remaining legally responsible for negligent hiring, retention, and supervision, significantly increasing liability without reducing responsibility,” said the organization.
“LD 1911 also applies to a wide range of offenses, including Class D and E convictions
for drug offenses and certain assaults, which may still pose workplace or public safety risks. The fixed waiting periods—five years for Class D and E offenses and ten years for Class A through C offenses—may not allow sufficient time to assess rehabilitation or risk fully,” they added.
LD 1941
Following a recess by the committee and the testimonies delivered on LD 1911 over Zoom, the Judiciary took up LD 1941, a bill from Rep. Nina Milliken (D-Blue Hill) that would reinstate the possibility of parole for incarcerated criminals, something the state has not had since 1976.
“If prisons made us safer the United States would be the safest place on Earth. We’re not even close,” said Rep. Milliken.
“As a state we have built a system that no longer believes in redemption, rehabilitation, or, frankly, in corrections at all,” she added.
Milliken has long been among the most radical “restorative justice” advocates in Maine politics. Just last session, she put forward a bill that would have entirely abolished life sentences, regardless of the crime committed.
On the same day as the hearing, the Bangor Daily News published an opinion piece from Milliken, where she offered a more detailed explanation of her bill.
Unlike Ross’ bill, Milliken’s drew no Republican co-sponsors.
Like Ross, the bill drew numerous testimonies, particularly from its supporters.
One of the most colorful testimonies came from Mr. Ephriam K. Bennett, who testified in support of the bill, discussed his own criminal history, and used the testimony to promote his book and upcoming podcast.
“Last night, I just received notice that my book just became not only a national bestseller, but that it’s been transferred over to be a New-York Times bestseller,” he said.
“Parole is not again, I think Parole you have to take measured steps to make sure that victims are taken care of. So what I did is I put in my book services to help victims. Every copy, this book just sold a million copies,” he added, “I’m in favor for parole because there are men who are doing work just like me that’s incarcerated.”
He also claimed that both Elon Musk and Procter & Gamble have reached out to him, offering their support.
After his testimony, one legislator asked Bennett for a reminder of his name, and he attempted to hand a copy of his book around so legislators could read it from that.
Despite his odd testimony, he did include some serious points and emphasized that he believes victims need to be factored into decisions on parole.
Numerous currently incarcerated prisoners also testified, either by having someone read their testimony for them or by submitting it online.
“The Maine Department of Corrections is at a standstill. Reestablishing parole would
reduce overcrowding, lower stress, and help bring back programs and accountability. It
would help people who are ready to change keep moving forward instead of being
stuck,” said Jeffery Witham.
He is currently in prison on a variety of charges, including multiple counts of kidnapping and domestic violence. His sentence was handed down in 2023.
The Maine Association for Criminal Defense Lawyers, unsurprisingly, came out in support of the bill.
“Maine is so small. Incarcerated folks aren’t some nameless faceless “big bads”. They
are our neighbors, our friends, our family members who deserve to be reintegrated into
our communities. Parole allows incarcerated folks to return to their communities with
the supports necessary to be successful and avoid recidivism,” they said.
Their testimony notably did not mention the victims of the incarcerated criminals at all.
The Maine Prosecutors Association testified “neither for nor against” the bill, rather than in full opposition.
“Some of our elected district attorneys are not against the premise of parole. However, this bill does not adequately address issues brought up by the Maine Coalition to End Domestic Violence,” they said.
The Maine Coalition to End Domestic Violence’s testimony opposed the bill on the grounds that it does not do enough to address potential threats to victims.
Maine Department of Corrections Deputy Commissioner Anthony Cantillo opposed the bill on behalf of the department, claiming that parole is unnecessary, given Maine’s existing programs such as supervised community release, which allows well-behaved prisoners to be released into the community under certain conditions.
