Former US president Donald Trump has appealed a ruling by Maine’s secretary of state barring him from the state’s 2024 ballot over his role in the January 6, 2021, attack on the US Capitol.
Key points:
Donald Trump’s lawyers argue his removal from the Maine ballot was “due to her bias”
He is also expected to appeal a similar decision in Colorado
Mr Trump contends he incited no riot, never swore to “support” the constitution and was not a government officer
On Tuesday, he contended she had no authority, that he incited no riot, never swore to “support” the constitution and was not a government officer as stipulated in the constitutional amendment she cited.
Mr Trump appealed the Maine decision by Democrat Shenna Bellows, who became the first secretary of state in history to bar someone from running for the presidency under the rarely used Section 3 of the 14th Amendment, which prohibits those who “engaged in insurrection” from holding office.
Mr Trump’s appeal on Tuesday asks that Ms Bellows be required to place him on the March 5 primary ballot and argues that she abused her discretion and relied on “untrustworthy evidence”.
“The secretary should have recused herself due to her bias against President Trump, as demonstrated by a documented history of prior statements prejudging the issue presented,” Mr Trump’s lawyers wrote.
Advertisement
Ms Bellows reiterated to The Associated Press on Tuesday that her ruling was on pause pending the outcome of the appeal, which had been expected.
“This is part of the process. I have confidence in my decision and confidence in the rule of law,” she said.
“This is Maine’s process and it’s really important that first and foremost every single one of us who serves in government uphold the Constitution and the laws of the state.”
Colorado appeal expected
Mr Trump is expected to appeal a similar ruling by the Colorado Supreme Court directly to the US Supreme Court, which has never issued a decision on Section 3.
The Colorado court’s 4-3 ruling that it applied to Mr Trump was the first time in history the provision was used to bar a presidential contender from the ballot.
Advertisement
Mr Trump’s critics have filed dozens of lawsuits seeking to disqualify him in multiple states.
None succeeded until a slim majority of Colorado’s seven justices — all of whom were appointed by Democratic governors — ruled against Mr Trump.
A week after Colorado’s ruling, Ms Bellows issued her own. Critics warned it was even more perilous because it could pave the way for partisan election officials to simply disqualify candidates they oppose.
Ms Bellows, a former head of Maine’s branch of the American Civil Liberties Union, has previously criticised Mr Trump and his behaviour on January 6.
Shenna Bellows says her ruling was on pause due to the appeal.(AP Photo: Robert F. Bukaty)
Advertisement
History of Section 3
The constitution’s Section 3 has been barely used since the years after the Civil War, when it kept defeated Confederates from returning to their former government positions.
The two-sentence clause says that anyone who swore an oath to “support” the constitution and then engaged in insurrection cannot hold office unless a two-thirds vote of Congress allows it.
Mr Trump’s lawyers argue the provision isn’t intended to apply to the president, contending that the oath for the top office in the land isn’t to “support” the constitution but instead to “preserve, protect and defend” it.
They also argue that the presidency isn’t explicitly mentioned in the amendment, only any “officer of the United States”.
Mr Trump made the opposite argument defending against his prosecution for falsifying business records by the Manhattan District Attorney’s office, contending the case should move to federal court because the president is “an officer of the United States”.
Advertisement
The prosecutors argued that language only applies to presidential appointees — Mr Trump’s position in Maine.
Pro-Trump protesters stormed the US Capitol building in an attempt to stop the certification of the 2020 US presidential election results on January 6, 2021.(Reuters: Shannon Stapleton)
The contention that Section 3 doesn’t apply to the president drew a scathing response from the Colorado Supreme Court last month.
“President Trump asks us to hold that Section 3 disqualifies every oath breaking insurrectionist except the most powerful one and that it bars oath breakers from virtually every office, both state and federal, except the highest one in the land,” the court’s majority opinion said.
“Both results are inconsistent with the plain language and history of Section 3.”
Advertisement
Section 3 recently returned to use. In 2022, a judge used it to remove a rural New Mexico county commissioner from office after he was convicted of a misdemeanour for entering the US Capitol on January 6.
Liberal groups sued to block Republican Representatives Madison Cawthorn and Marjorie Taylor Greene from running for re-election because of their roles on that day. Mr Cawthorn’s case became moot when he lost his primary in 2022, and a judge ruled to keep Ms Greene on the ballot.
Some conservatives warn that, if Mr Trump is removed, political groups will routinely use Section 3 against opponents in unexpected ways.
Mr Trump and his allies have attacked the cases against him as “anti-democratic” and sought to tie them to President Joe Biden because the Colorado case and some others are funded by liberal groups who share prominent donors with the Democratic president. But Mr Biden’s administration has noted that the president has no role in the litigation.
Those who support using the provision against Mr Trump counter that the January 6 attack was unprecedented in American history and that there will be few cases so ripe for Section 3.
Advertisement
If the high court lets Mr Trump stay on the ballot, they’ve contended, it will be another example of the former president bending the legal system to excuse his extreme behaviour.
In New York City, two notable figures with connections to Maine teamed up Friday for a performance of a time-tested tune: “Wheels on the Bus.”
New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani and sensational children’s educator Ms. Rachel sung the children’s nursery rhyme with a group of preschoolers at a Lower Manhattan pre-K as part of an announcement of free childcare for 2-year-olds in New York City.
In addition to a commitment to expanding accessible childcare, both Mamdani and Ms. Rachel, whose full name is Rachel Griffin Accurso, hold ties to the state of Maine.
On YouTube, Accurso, 43, shares widely beloved educational videos for toddlers. Her channel has over 18 million subscribers and more than 14 billion views, with some episodes streaming on Netflix as well.
Accurso grew up in the Springvale area of Sanford and graduated from Sanford High School. Her singing career began in the Portland area before she moved to New York City. Accurso also served on Mamdani’s inaugural committee.
Advertisement
An advocate for children everywhere, her outspoken concern for Palestinian children in Gaza has garnered her both praise and criticism this past year.
Mamdani’s connection to Maine anchors in Brunswick, where he attended Bowdoin College. At the small liberal arts college, from which he graduated in 2014, he majored in Africana studies, was involved in the student newspaper and co-founded the college’s chapter of Students for Justice in Palestine.
While Accurso is much more experienced in entertaining children than the new mayor, she shared how Mamdani, 34, rose to the occasion on Friday.
She wrote on Instagram how the night before they sang, she sent Mamdani’s team a video of “Wheels on the Bus” in case he wanted to rehearse it, expecting the mayor to be too busy. But his team immediately wrote back saying he wanted to practice the song, she said.
“He showed up and nailed the song and choreo,” Accurso wrote. “You can tell he really cares about the children.”
Advertisement
Mamdani and Accurso also led a rendition of “If You’re Happy and You Know It,” followed by a discussion with the children about their feelings. Mamdani said he was feeling happy because of universal childcare for all 2-year-olds in the city.
The duo’s appearance at the pre-K followed the announcement on Thursday – Mamdani’s eighth day in office – that New York Gov. Kathy Hochul will partner with Mamdani to deliver free childcare for two-year-olds in New York City starting in September, as well as strengthening the existing 3K program. The state committed to funding the program for two years, according to the city’s website, and the program will impact nearly 100,000 children.
Steve Heinz of Cumberland is a member of the Maine Council of Trout Unlimited (Merrymeeting Bay chapter).
Man’s got to eat.
It’s a simple truth, and in Maine it carries a lot of weight. For generations, people here have hunted, fished and gathered food not just as a pastime, but as a practical part of life. That reality helps explain why Maine voters embraced a constitutional right to food — and why emotions run high when fishing regulations are challenged in court.
A recent lawsuit targeting Maine’s fly-fishing-only regulations has sparked exactly that reaction. The Maine Council of Trout Unlimited believes this moment calls for clarity and restraint. The management of Maine’s fisheries belongs with professional biologists and the public process they oversee, not in the courtroom.
Advertisement
Trout Unlimited is not an anti-harvest organization, nor a club devoted to elevating one style of angling over another. We are a coldwater conservation organization focused on sustaining healthy, resilient fisheries.
Maine’s reputation as the last great stronghold of wild brook trout did not happen by accident; it is the product of decades of careful management by the Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife (MDIFW), guided by science, field experience and public participation.
Fly-fishing-only waters are one of the tools MDIFW uses to protect vulnerable fisheries. They are not about exclusivity. In most cases, fly fishing involves a single hook, results in lower hooking mortality and lends itself to catch-and-release practices. The practical effect is straightforward: more fish survive and more people get a chance to fish.
Maine’s trout waters are fundamentally different from the fertile rivers of the Midwest and Mid-Atlantic states. Our freestone streams are cold, fast and naturally nutrient-poor. Thin soils, granite bedrock and dense forests limit aquatic productivity, meaning brook trout grow more slowly and reproduce in smaller numbers.
A single season of low flows, high water temperatures or habitat disturbance can set a population back for years. In Maine, conservation is not a luxury; it is a biological necessity.
Advertisement
In more fertile southern waters, abundant insects and richer soils allow trout populations to rebound quickly from heavy harvest and environmental stress. Maine’s waters simply do not have that buffer.
Every wild brook trout here is the product of limited resources and fragile conditions. When fish are removed faster than they can be replaced, recovery is slow and uncertain. That reality is why management tools such as fly-fishing-only waters, reduced bag limits and seasonal protections matter so much.
These rules are not about denying access; they are about matching human use to ecological capacity so fisheries remain viable over time. Climate change only raises the stakes, as warmer summers and lower late-season flows increasingly push cold-water fisheries to their limits.
Healthy trout streams also safeguard drinking water, support wildlife and sustain rural economies through guiding and outdoor tourism. Conservation investments ripple far beyond the streambank.
Lawsuits short-circuit the management system that has served Maine well for decades. Courts are not designed to weigh fisheries science or balance competing uses of a complex public resource. That work is best done through open meetings, public input and adaptive management informed by professionals who spend their careers studying Maine’s waters.
Advertisement
Man’s got to eat. But if we want Maine’s trout fisheries to endure, we also have to manage them wisely. That means trusting science, respecting process and recognizing that conservation — not confrontation — is what keeps food on the table and fish in the water.
TJ Biel scored 21 points and Newport native Ace Flagg added 10 points and seven rebounds as the University of Maine men’s basketball team held on for a 74-70 win over the New Jersey Institute of Technology on Saturday in Newark, New Jersey.
Logan Carey added 11 points and five assists for the Black Bears, who improve to 3-15 overall and 1-2 in the conference. Yanis Bamba chipped in 14 points.
Maine led by seven at the half, but NJIT went on a 13-0 run in the first four minutes to take a 43-37 lead. The Black Bears recovered and took the lead on a dunk by Keelan Steele with 7:53 left and held on for the win.
Sebastian Robinson scored 24 points and Ari Fulton grabbed 11 rebounds for NJIT (7-11, 2-1).
