SENATE'S REQUEST FOR OPINION OF THE JUSTICES

(RANKED-CHOICE VOTING)

Opinion of the Justices: The Justices issued their Opinion on May 23, 2017: 2017 ME 100 Opinion of the Justices Oral Argument Recording The audio recording of the oral argument on April 13, 2017, is now available: Stream the audio recording Download the audio recording (mp3) (right-click link and choose option to download or save) The following attorneys argued: On the issue of whether the Senate’s questions present a “solemn occasion”: Timothy Woodcock, Esq., of Eaton Peabody, Bangor, argued on behalf of the Maine State Senate

Phyllis Gardiner, Assistant Attorney General, argued on behalf of the Attorney General and the Secretary of State

James Kilbreth, Esq., of Drummond Woodsum, Portland, argued on behalf of the Committee for Ranked Choice Voting On the merits of the questions propounded: Joshua Dunlap, Esq., of Pierce Atwood, Portland, argued on behalf of the House Republican Caucus and the Maine Heritage Policy Center

Phyllis Gardiner, Assistant Attorney General, argued on behalf of the Attorney General and the Secretary of State

James Kilbreth, Esq., of Drummond Woodsum, Portland, argued on behalf of the Committee for Ranked Choice Voting

Rachel Wertheimer, Esq., of Verrill Dana, Portland, argued on behalf of the League of Women Voters of Maine and the Maine Citizens for Clean Elections

All information on the Senate's request for an opinion of the Justices, including all filings and schedules, will be posted on this page. The Clerk's office will not be able to provide any additional information.

On February 7, 2017, the Maine State Senate submitted the following questions to the Justices of the Supreme Judicial Court, pursuant to Article VI, Section 3 of the Maine Constitution, regarding An Act to Establish Ranked-Choice Voting, which was approved by Maine voters on November 8, 2016, pursuant to Article IV, Part Third, Section 18 of the Maine Constitution:

Question 1. Does the Act's requirement that the Secretary of State count the votes centrally

in multiple rounds conflict with the provisions of the Constitution of Maine that require that the

city and town officials sort, count, declare and record the votes in elections for Representative,

Senator and Governor as provided in the Constitution of Maine, Article IV, Part First, Section 5,

Article IV, Part Second, Section 3 and Article V, Part First, Section 3? Question 2. Does the method of ranked-choice voting established by the Act in elections for

Representative, Senator and Governor violate the provisions of the Constitution of Maine, Article

IV, Part First, Section 5, Article IV, Part Second, Sections 3 and 4 and Article V, Part First,

Section 3, respectively, which declare that the person elected shall be the candidate who receives

a plurality of all the votes counted and declared by city and town officials as recorded on lists

returned to the Secretary of State? Question 3. Does the requirement in the Act that a tie between candidates for Governor in

the final round of counting be decided by lot conflict with the provisions of the Constitution of

Maine, Article V, Part First, Section 3 relating to resolution of a tie vote for Governor by the

House of Representatives and Senate?

The Justices have issued a procedural order establishing the process that they will use to consider the questions. Briefs are due by 4:00 p.m. on Friday, March 3, 2017, with responsive briefs permitted by noon on Friday, March 17, 2017.

Oral argument will be held on Thursday, April 13, 2017, at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 7 (the historic ceremonial courtroom) of the Capital Judicial Center, 1 Court Street, Augusta. [Note that location of oral argument on April 13 has changed since the issuance of the original procedural order. It will be held at the Capital Judicial Center in Augusta.]