Maine court declines to rule in Trump ballot case before US Supreme Court

The Maine Superior Court declined to rule on the appeal of Secretary of State Shenna Bellows’ earlier decision to disqualify former President Donald Trump from the Republican primary ballot. 

In a decision filed on Wednesday, Judge Michaela Murphy returned the question of Trump’s eligibility to Bellows, ordering her to issue a new ruling after the U.S. Supreme Court decides on a similar case out of Colorado.

Bellows, a Democrat, disqualified Trump from Maine’s presidential primary ballot last month because of his role in the Jan. 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol under the Constitution’s “insurrection clause” —  making Maine the second state to do so after Colorado. 

Both Bellows and the Colorado Supreme Court ruled that Trump was ineligible for the primary ballot under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which prohibits those who took an oath to uphold the Constitution and then “engaged in insurrection or rebellion” from holding office again. 

The Colorado decision has since been taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court. Oral arguments for that case are scheduled for Feb. 8. 

While it is not unprecedented for secretary of states to remove candidates from their state ballots, Bellows is the first to bar a candidate from ballot access under the 14th Amendment, a decision she has since received criticism and threats over. Republican state representatives also attempted to impeach her at the start of the legislative session earlier this month, a move that failed in a mostly party-line 60-80 vote. 

Behind 14th Amendment argument to disqualify Trump: process, reasoning and the role of partisanship

Bellows is reviewing the decision and declined to comment at this time.

Breaking down the Superior Court decision 

Throughout briefs filed in the Maine Superior Court in Kennebec County this month, Trump’s counsel argued that Maine election law was not designed to resolve complex constitutional questions and that Bellows should have recused herself because of bias. 

The ballot challenge process in Maine is distinct from other states in requiring a ruling by the secretary of state before being heard in court. However, Bellows had stayed her Dec. 28 decision to disqualify Trump pending appeal, ultimately leaving the ruling up to the courts.

The Superior Court has placed the decision back in her hands, however. 

Judge Michaela Murphy stayed Bellows’ Dec. 28 ruling further, until the Supreme Court rules on the Colorado case. Once that decision is public, Bellows will have 30 days to issue a new ruling modifying, withdrawing or confirming her prior ruling. 

Because there are so many federal issues in the case before the high court, Murphy wrote that it would be imprudent for the Superior Court to be the first court in Maine to address them. 

“Put simply, the United States Supreme Court’s acceptance of the Colorado case changes everything about the order in which these issues should be decided, and by which court,” Murphy wrote. “And while it is impossible to know what the Supreme Court will decide, hopefully it will at least clarify what role, if any, state decision-makers, including secretaries of state and state judicial officers, play in adjudicating claims of disqualification brought under Section 3 of the 14th Amendment.” 

Maine’s primary election is on March 5, so unless the Supreme Court finds Trump ineligible before then, Maine voters will see his name on the ballot. Maine’s military and overseas voters, whose ballots are mailed out on Jan. 20, will see his name regardless.

Lead up to court ruling 

Since Trump appealed Bellows’ decision on Jan. 2, Murphy has considered a series of requests from Trump’s counsel to stay proceedings and consider additional evidence. 

Shortly after the appeal, Trump asked the court to delay its proceedings until the highest court rules on the Colorado decision. Bellows had asked the court to deny this request, writing in a brief that delaying proceedings would put the integrity of the election at risk. The court doesn’t have the authority to deviate from the deadline set by Maine statute, Bellows added, which stipulates that it issue its decision within 20 days of her decision. 

Murphy agreed with this assessment. In her decision released on Wednesday, Murphy wrote that the court does not have the authority to stay proceedings but does have the authority to order Bellows to issue a new ruling in light of the eventual high court decision. 

Trump had also requested that Murphy consider additional evidence in making her determination, specifically that Bellows had personal and professional ties to two of the citizens who submitted a joint challenge to Trump’s ballot eligibility that should have been disclosed. Murphy also denied Trump’s motion to supplement the record. 

House votes down impeachment order against Sec. Bellows over Trump ruling

Bellows heard three challenges to Trump’s eligibility in a hearing on Dec. 15, two of which cited the 14th Amendment argument. A bipartisan group of former Maine elected officials filed one of the 14th Amendment challenges. 

Trump’s legal counsel claimed Bellows and one of those challengers, Ethan Strimling, were former colleagues at the education nonprofit LearningWorks, citing Strimling’s LinkedIn as the source. In reality, Bellows replaced Strimling as executive director, after Strimling stepped down to begin serving as mayor of Portland in 2015. 

Trump’s counsel also wrote that challenger Thomas Saviello, a former Republican member of the state Senate, said in an interview that he “knew her very well personally.”Saviello and Bellows served in the Maine Legislature at the same time.

Bellows wrote in a brief filed in response that this information was “not even remotely indicative of bias.” 

Bellows also received a third challenge from Portland Lawyer Paul Gordon, who argued Trump was ineligible under the 22nd Amendment, which outlines term limits, because the former president has maintained that he won the 2020 election. Bellows did not agree with this challenge in her Dec. 28 ruling. 

Since her ruling, Bellows has maintained that she did her job under the law. 

“It is required under Maine election laws to hold a hearing and issue a ruling, and that starts the process of going to the courts,” Bellows told Maine Morning Star during an interview following the formal impeachment order against her and Trump’s appeal. “That’s really important. That’s the way it should work.” 

Bellows has also said that she will implement whatever decision the court issues.