AUGUSTA, Maine - Gov. Paul LePage has asked the Maine Supreme Court to decide whether he missed his deadline to veto dozens of bills, as the Maine Legislature and the attorney general have said, or whether his own interpretation of the Constitution is correct.
At issue is LePage’s contention that when the Legislature adjourned June 30 until a time to be determined by the Senate President and the House Speaker, he lost the ability to deliver vetoes to the Legislature since they were not in session and no time certain was set for when they would return.
"The problem is they did not give me the opportunity to return the vetoes," he says. "They left and said they’ll be back when the speaker and president calls them back."
In an interview Friday, the governor went on to cite Article 4, Part 3, Section 2 of the Maine Constitution that governs vetoes. He says, in effect, the Legislature ended its first regular session, and he says a different part of the Constitution allows him to veto bills after lawmakers have returned for three days.
"That gives me 10 days, plus it starts the three-day wait once they get back," LePage says. "And that was the reason. And it is so clear in the Constitution, and I don't understand why they are even questioning it. It is so obvious."
But the governor's interpretation is not shared by the Legislature. House Speaker Mark Eves, a Democrat from North Berwick, says when the Legislature adjourned on June 30, it relied on the same language that was used four years ago by the then Republican-controlled Legislature. Back then, LePage sent vetoes to that Legislature within the 10 days and before lawmakers returned to session.
"The bills have become law," Eves says. "It is extremely clear; the Constitution outlines that very clearly. So, the physical bills have been given to the reviser's office because they are law."
Republican Senate President Mike Thibodeau agrees with Eves. He says if the court rules for LePage, the Legislature can consider the vetoes next January. Attorney General Janet Mills doubts that will happen. She says the governor is misreading the Constitution and ignoring decades of legal precedent in which the Legislature has clearn established when a session has ended by using a specific motion known as "sine die," a Latin phrase meeting "without day."
"A final adjournment is a final adjournment," Mills says, "and they are very specific about doing that for good reason - because that’s when the 90 days starts when people could start the people’s veto, the 90 days for determining when a law becomes a law, 90 days after adjournment, not after a temporary or day-to-day adjournment."
The Maine Supreme Court will decide first if the questions sent by the governor meet the threshold for an advisory opinion, known as a solemn occasion. The court may ask for legal arguments on that question or it could simply decide on its own. If there is a solemn occasion, the court could schedule oral arguments on the issue.
There is no time frame set in the Constitution on how long the justices can take to issue an opinion. In the past they have given questions brought as a solemn occasion precedence over other matters and decided them in a matter of weeks.
