Everything you need to know about ranked-choice voting in one spot. Click to learn more!

Maine Superior Court: Referendum challenging agency action will remain on November ballot (2020)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
New Administrative State Banner.png
Administrative State
Administrative State Icon Gold.png
Five Pillars of the Administrative State
Agency control
Executive control
Judicial control
Legislative control
Public Control

Click here for more coverage of the administrative state on Ballotpedia.
Click here to access Ballotpedia's administrative state legislation tracker.


June 29, 2020

On June 29th, Cumberland County Superior Court Justice Thomas Warren decided not to remove a Maine ballot referendum from the November 2020 ballot that challenges a state agency decision to give permission to build a high-voltage power line. Opponents of the referendum argued in court that the ballot measure violates the separation of powers provision found in Article III of the Maine Constitution.

Warren ruled “that the lawsuit raises important questions about the separation of powers under the Maine Constitution but said the ‘substantive challenges to the validity of the proposed initiative may not be reviewed at this time,’” according to a report from Associated Press.[1]

The opponents argued that the measure would be an exercise of executive authority by reversing an agency order and of judicial authority by overturning a related court decision. They claim that Maine’s constitutional referendum provisions do not give the people of the state authority to exercise the powers of those branches of government.

According to Article IV of the Maine Constitution, citizens may exercise the legislative power through direct initiative. A company associated with the power line project argued that this particular initiative goes beyond an exercise of legislative authority by the people because “it would enact no law, would repeal no law, and would amend no law.”

In its report, Associated Press said, “Maine Secretary of State Matthew Dunlap agrees on the constitutional issue but proposed keeping the matter on the ballot as an advisory referendum.”[1]

See also

External links

Footnotes