(The Center Square) — A Maine GOP lawmaker has her legislative voting rights restored after the U.S. Supreme Court blocked her censure by the Democratic-controlled state Legislature for identifying a transgender teen athlete in a viral social-media post.
In a 7-2 ruling Tuesday, the high court’s conservative majority granted state Rep. Laurel Libby’s request for a preliminary injunction blocking the Maine House of Representatives’ censure vote. Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented.
The majority’s decision, which wasn’t explained, lifts restrictions that prevented the Auburn Republican from voting on bills or speaking on legislative matters while the legal challenge plays out in court.
“This is a victory not just for my constituents, but for the Constitution itself,” Libby said in a statement. “The Supreme Court has affirmed what should never have been in question — that no state legislature has the power to silence an elected official simply for speaking truthfully about issues that matter.”
Libby was censured in February by the Democratic-controlled state House of Representatives after posting a picture on social media that identified a minor transgender student-athlete.
A lawsuit in March by Libby and several of her constituents sought to overturn the censure vote brought by House Speaker Ryan Fecteau, D-Biddeford, but the legal challenge was rejected by a federal judge who said the court lacks jurisdiction to meddle in the “internal” policies of the Maine Legislature.
Libby appealed the ruling, but the First Circuit Court of Appeals issued a ruling Friday denying her request. The appellate panel said Libby’s lawyers failed to show the lawsuit was likely to succeed and that she — or her constituents — would be irreparably harmed if the legislative censure remains in place. But Libby petitioned the Supreme Court to take up her case.
The lawmakers’ legal fight is backed by West Virginia Attorney General John McCuskey and 14 other Republican attorneys general who asked the high court to grant Libby’s request for a preliminary injunction.
In her dissenting opinion, Justice Jackson questioned whether the emergency relief was necessary given “that there are no significant legislative votes” scheduled in the coming weeks and suggested that her district would not suffer any “concrete, imminent, and significant harm” while the lower court considers her appeal.
However, Libby said the court majority’s ruling in her favor “restores the voice of 9,000 Mainers who were wrongly silenced.”
“I am grateful for the court’s action, and I am ready to get back to work representing the people of House District 90,” she said.
