Maine madness: Lawmaker still banned from House floor over social post

A Maine legislator filed a lawsuit against the state’s House speaker last week, contending that a censure vote against her violates her First Amendment rights. In February, the Maine House of Representatives banned Republican Rep. Laurel Libby from speaking or voting on the state House floor after she posted on social media about a male high school athlete who won a girls’ pole vaulting competition.

Libby’s post stems from Maine’s refusal to comply with President Donald Trump’s recent executive order that protects female athletes from males’ participation in girls’ and women’s sports, she told WORLD. Her statement and the legislators’ backlash against her have pushed Maine to the forefront of a national debate over state policies for male athletes who say they are female.

On Feb. 17, Libby posted two photos on Facebook of the same athlete. In one photo, a male athlete who identifies as a girl is seen standing on the first-place podium for the state championship pole vaulting competition. The other depicts him in a previous competition—in the boys’ division, where he received fifth place.

“We’ve learned that just *ONE* year ago John was competing in [boys’] pole vault … that’s when he had his 5th place finish,” Libby wrote in the post. “Tonight, ‘Katie’ won 1st place in the girls’ Maine State Class B Championship.”

Her post quickly went viral, according to the lawsuit, generating more than 100,000 reactions and 60,000 comments on Facebook. Maine House Speaker Ryan Fecteau soon asked Libby to take down the post, citing privacy concerns for the athlete, who is a minor. Libby refused.

Days after Libby’s post, during a White House meeting for state governors, Trump argued with Maine Gov. Janet Mills about the state’s refusal to follow federal guidance on protecting girls’ and women’s sports. “You’d better do it, because you’re not going to get any federal funding at all if you don’t,” he told her. Last week, the U.S. Department of Agriculture stopped and then restarted agriculture funding for Maine’s public colleges and universities.

On Feb. 25, the Maine House passed a resolution by a 75-70 vote that censured Libby. The resolution said her post was “reprehensible” and “incompatible with her duty and responsibilities as a member of this House.” The censure bars Libby from speaking on the House floor or voting on legislation until she apologizes for her post.

In an unusual move, all six of Maine’s federal judges recused themselves from the case and sent it to the District of Rhode Island because a court employee had an unexplained connection to the case.

Libby said that, as a Christian, she believes in God’s biological design for men and women in sports, and she wanted to highlight the negative effects of men competing in women’s sports.

“It’s shocking to see a biological male standing on a podium, taking the place of females,” Libby said. “I keep coming back to those young women who have worked so hard, trained … so hard for years of their life and the look of disbelief on their face as a biological male wins a medal, a trophy, that they have worked so hard to compete for. It’s absolutely not fair.”

In a February statement, House Speaker Fecteau said that “sharing images of kids online without their consent is a clear violation of the bond of trust and respect between citizens and their legislators.” He declined to comment to WORLD on the pending litigation against him.

However, Libby contends that the student’s name, school, and photos were taken at a public competition and readily available on the internet, according to the complaint. She noted that Fecteau has also posted similar photos of high school athletes on his own social media.

Libby argued that the censure disenfranchises the 9,000 Mainers she represents, and she hopes her lawsuit will ensure her free speech rights as an elected representative to represent her constituents without “fear of repercussions.”

The case displays a “stark situation” for legislators’ speech rights, said Daniel Ortner, an attorney for the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression. While the legislature has some control over speech or decorum on the House floor, it has no right to silence Libby’s voting rights and speech over her post, he said.

“This is a Facebook post … on her own social media account,” Ortner said. “The legislature doesn’t have any control, can’t tell her not to say what she wants to say.”

He echoed Libby’s argument that she violated no privacy concerns because the athlete’s name and images were already public knowledge. He said if a newspaper had published the same photos, this would be easily recognized as an “open-and-shut case” of protected speech. If Libby loses, the decision could have chilling consequences for speech nationwide, he noted.

“For citizens, it’s really disturbing the precedent it would set if a legislator could disenfranchise them,” Ortner said. “To say your representative can’t even vote or speak on your behalf because we don’t like what she said—that’s a really chilling picture of the future that we should all be concerned about whether we are Democrat or Republican.”

This case could have religious rights ramifications, as well, said Keisha Russell, an attorney for First Liberty Institute.

Because Libby’s post involves her religious beliefs, the House’s censure “doubly” violates protected speech, Russell said, adding that it is “tyrannical” for the state to try and suppress Libby’s religious views.

Though Russell anticipates Libby will ultimately win this case, the lower level court might initially rule against her. She said it’s vital for Libby to keep fighting this legal battle to show that no state can silence a legislator for sharing protected speech online.

“I will absolutely continue to fight to have the right to represent [my constituents] fully,” Libby said. “It is not right that the Democrat majority in Augusta has the ability to silence them by silencing me with a simple majority vote.”