Maine Sovereign Citizens Merletti, McCarthy Resurface as Part of “LePage Vs Mills” Judicial CaseOn the day that Governor Paul LePage swore Maine’s three constitutional officers into office (albeit breaking from modern day tradition with two behind closed doors in his cabinet room and the third publicly in the Hall of Flags), there were a few other people of note outside the governor’s office and trying to get a few moments with LePage- to wit, his chums Phil Merletti and Wayne Leach.
You remember… the ones, along with Aroostook Watchman Jack McCarthy that Mike Tipping made famous last year? Here’s a timeline to refresh your memory.
Anyhoo… seems that a little birdie told these fellas that they would be well served to submit an amicus brief to the Maine Supreme Court, as part of Governor LePage’s going to the Maine Supreme Judicial Court to squeal on the oh so very mean Attorney General Janet Mills, who won’t let Paul play with all the toys.
He hasn’t been so mad since the Legislative Council made him move his TV from behind the stairs!
But back to Merletti and McCarthy, because there is more than a dash of irony in them filing the papers in the first place. As was questioned by Portland Press Herald’s Greg Kasich: “Do they recognize the supreme court?”
It is a wonder, to be sure. But see for yourselves!
Here are the entire proceedings, as shared on the State of Maine Judicial Branch “Governor’s Request for Opinion of the Justices” page of the case. Click on “Brief of Lise McLain and Dorothy Lafortune”, to find where Merletti and McCarthy pop up.
GOVERNOR’S REQUEST FOR OPINION OF THE JUSTICES
On Friday January 23, 2015, the Governor of the State of Maine, Paul R. LePage, referred two questions to the Supreme Judicial Court related to the legal representation of the Governor and the Executive Branch in litigation. A copy of the letter setting forth the questions is linked to below.
The Justices invite the Governor’s Office, the Attorney General’s Office and any interested person or entity to submit briefs addressing
- whether the questions propounded present, individually or together, a “solemn occasion[ ],” pursuant to article VI, section 3 of the Maine Constitution; and
- the law regarding either or each of the questions propounded.
Any person or entity wishing to submit a brief to the Court shall do so by filing the brief with the Clerk of the Supreme Judicial Court, in Portland, at 205 Newbury Street, Room 139, Portland, Maine 04101, at or before noon on Friday, February 6, 2015. Briefs shall not be longer than thirty pages, double spaced. Responsive briefs are not required, but may be filed by any person or entity that filed an initial brief, at or before noon on Friday, February 13, 2015. Responsive briefs shall not be longer than ten pages, double spaced.
To facilitate public and judicial review of all filings, the justices request that an electronic copy of any hard copy brief filed be emailed as a pdf file to email@example.com.
Oral Argument will be held on February 26, 2015, in Portland at 10:00 a.m.
- Letter from the Governor
- Procedural Order
- Briefs (listed in the order received):
- Brief of Lise McLain and Dorothy Lafortune
- Brief of Audrey Spence
- Brief of Peter Brann, Esq.
- Brief of Governor Paul R. LePage
- Brief of Attorney General Janet T. Mills
- Reply brief of Audrey Spence
- Reply brief of Governor Paul R. LePage
- Reply brief of Attorney General Janet T. Mills
- Reply brief of Lise McLain
- Other documents (in order received):
- Motion for leave to participate in the oral argument
- Letter and attachment from Governor’s Office
- Letter and attachment from Attorney General’s Office
- Order denying motion for leave to participate in oral argument
- Disclosure by the Justices pursuant to Canon 3(E)(3)
of the Maine Code of Judicial Conduct
Now this is where the legal clown car gets a tad crowded- the above “Motion for leave to participate in the oral argument“. Merletti and McCarthy asserted today in court that their vast experience as researchers is required by the Court, for the Court to fully understand the case. Needless to say, this motion was summarily denied by the Court.
Indeed, Justice is blind.
(To be updated)