Maine
Trump appeals Maine ruling barring him from ballot under insurrection clause
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.
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.
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.
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”.
The prosecutors argued that language only applies to presidential appointees — Mr Trump’s position in Maine.
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.”
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.
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.
AP
Maine
Maine legalized iGaming. Will tribes actually benefit?
Maine’s gambling landscape is set to expand after Gov. Janet Mills decided Thursday to let tribes offer online casino games, but numerous questions remain over the launch of the new market and how much it will benefit the Wabanaki Nations.
Namely, there is no concrete timeline for when the new gambling options that make Maine the eighth “iGaming” state will become available. Maine’s current sports betting market that has been dominated by the Passamaquoddy Tribe through its partnership with DraftKings is evidence that not all tribes may reap equal rewards.
A national anti-online gaming group also vowed to ask Maine voters to overturn the law via a people’s veto effort and cited its own poll finding a majority of Mainers oppose online casino gaming.
Here are the big remaining questions around iGaming.
1. When will iGaming go into effect?
The law takes effect 90 days after the Legislature adjourns this year. Adjournment is slated for mid-April, but Mills spokesperson Ben Goodman noted it is not yet known when lawmakers will actually finish their work.
2. Where will the iGaming revenue go?
The iGaming law gives the state 18% of the gross receipts, which will translate into millions of dollars annually for gambling addiction and opioid use treatment funds, Maine veterans, school renovation loans and emergency housing relief.
Leaders of the four federally recognized tribes in Maine highlighted the “life-changing revenue” that will come thanks to the decision from Mills, a Democrat who has clashed with the Wabanaki Nations over the years over more sweeping tribal sovereignty measures.
But one chief went so far Thursday as to call her the “greatest ever” governor for “Wabanaki economic progress.”
3. What gaming companies will the tribes work with?
DraftKings has partnered with the Passamaquoddy to dominate Maine’s sports betting market, while the Penobscot Nation, the Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians and the Mi’kmaq Nation have partnered with Caesars Entertainment to garner a smaller share of the revenue.
Wall Street analysts predicted the two companies will likely remain the major players in Maine’s iGaming market.
The partnership between the Passamaquoddy and DraftKings has brought in more than $100 million in gross revenue since 2024, but the Press Herald reported last month that some members of the tribe’s Sipayik reservation have criticized Chief Amkuwiposohehs “Pos” Bassett, saying they haven’t reaped enough benefits from the gambling money.
4. Has Mills always supported gambling measures?
The iGaming measure from Rep. Ambureen Rana, D-Bangor, factored into a long-running debate in Maine over gambling. In 2022, lawmakers and Mills legalized online sports betting and gave tribes the exclusive rights to offer it beginning in 2023.
But allowing online casino games such as poker and roulette in Maine looked less likely to become reality under Mills. Her administration had previously testified against the bill by arguing the games are addictive.
But Mills, who is in the final year of her tenure and is running in the high-profile U.S. Senate primary for the chance to unseat U.S. Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, said Thursday she would let the iGaming bill become law without her signature. She said she viewed iGaming as a way to “improve the lives and livelihoods of the Wabanaki Nations.”
5. Who is against iGaming?
Maine’s two casinos in Bangor and Oxford opposed the iGaming bill, as did Gambling Control Board Chair Steve Silver and the Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention, among other opponents.
Silver noted Hollywood Casino Bangor and Oxford Casino employ nearly 1,000 Mainers, and he argued that giving tribes exclusive rights to iGaming will lead to job losses.
He also said in a Friday interview the new law will violate existing statutes by cutting out his board from iGaming oversight.
“I don’t think there’s anything the board can do at this point,” Silver said.
The National Association Against iGaming has pledged to mount an effort to overturn the law via a popular referendum process known as the “people’s veto.” But such attempts have a mixed record of success.
Maine
Flu, norovirus and other illnesses circulating in Maine
While influenza remains the top concern for Maine public health experts, other viruses are also currently circulating, including norovirus and COVID-19.
“Influenza is clearly the main event,” said Dr. Cheryl Liechty, a MaineHealth infectious disease specialist. “The curve in terms of the rise of influenza cases was really steep.”
Maine reported 1,343 flu cases for the week ending Jan. 3, an uptick from the 1,283 cases recorded the previous week, according to the Maine Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Hospitalizations increased to 147 from 108 during the same time periods.
“I hope the peak is now,” Liechty said, “but I’m not really sure.”
The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported on Friday that all of New England, except for Vermont, is currently experiencing “very high” levels of influenza. Vermont is in the “moderate” category.
“What we are seeing, overwhelmingly, is the flu,” said Andrew Donovan, associate vice president of infection prevention for Northern Light Health. “We are seeing both respiratory and gastrointestinal viruses in our patients.”
Norovirus also appears to be circulating, although due to its short duration and because it’s less severe than the flu, public health data on the illness — which causes gastrointestinal symptoms that typically resolve within a few days — is not as robust.
“Norovirus is the gastrointestinal scourge of New England winters and cruise ships,” Liechty said.
According to surveillance data at wastewater treatment plants in Portland, Bangor and Lewiston, norovirus levels detected in those communities are currently “high.” The treatment plants participate in WastewaterSCAN, which reports virus levels in wastewater through a program run by Stanford University and Emory University.
Dr. Genevieve Whiting, a Westbrook pediatrician and secretary of the Maine chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics, said viruses are prevalent right now, especially the flu and norovirus.
“For my patients right now, it’s a rare encounter that I hear everyone in a family has been healthy,” Whiting said. “I’ve had families come in and say their entire family has had norovirus. Several of my patients have had ER visits for suspected norovirus, where they needed IV fluids because they were dehydrated.”
Both Liechty and Whiting said they are seeing less respiratory syncytial virus, or RSV, likely because there has been good uptake of the new RSV vaccine, which is recommended for older people and those who are pregnant. The vaccine was approved by the Food and Drug Administration in 2023.
“The RSV vaccine has been a real success, as RSV was a leading cause of hospitalizations for babies,” Whiting said.
Meanwhile, COVID-19 cases increased to 610 in the final week of 2025, compared to 279 the previous week. Influenza and COVID-19 vaccinations are available at primary care, pharmacies and clinics across the state.
“If you haven’t gotten your flu shot yet,” Liechty said, “you should beat a hasty path to get your shot.”
Maine
After feds cut key food insecurity survey, Maine lawmaker urges state to fill data void
-
Detroit, MI7 days ago2 hospitalized after shooting on Lodge Freeway in Detroit
-
Technology4 days agoPower bank feature creep is out of control
-
Dallas, TX5 days agoDefensive coordinator candidates who could improve Cowboys’ brutal secondary in 2026
-
Dallas, TX2 days agoAnti-ICE protest outside Dallas City Hall follows deadly shooting in Minneapolis
-
Iowa4 days agoPat McAfee praises Audi Crooks, plays hype song for Iowa State star
-
Health6 days agoViral New Year reset routine is helping people adopt healthier habits
-
Nebraska3 days agoOregon State LB transfer Dexter Foster commits to Nebraska
-
Delaware1 day agoMERR responds to dead humpback whale washed up near Bethany Beach