The sleepy world of Maine politics seldom makes national headlines. Over the holiday break, however, events in Augusta became the unlikely center of a contentious, unfolding national debate on democratic norms, election eligibility and the meaning of insurrection.

Using the Fourteenth Amendment, Maine’s Shenna Bellows made history by becoming the first secretary of state to employ this Reconstruction-era measure to disqualify a major presidential candidate. As a result of her decision, Maine became the second state to bar Donald Trump from its primary ballot. Since making her decision to remove Trump from Maine’s ballot, Bellows has faced fierce backlash and threats — anger that sparked a Republican-backed effort to begin impeachment investigations against her. 

On Jan. 9, the Maine House of Representatives rejected the initiative by an 80-60 party-line vote. All four of Lewiston’s representatives voted against the order, which would have created a House Special Investigative Committee to investigate Bellows and “submit… recommendations… as to whether cause exists for impeachment.” 

Bellows’ critics argued that her disqualification of Trump amounted to anti-democratic “malfeasance.” During his speech on the House floor, for example, Representative James Thorne (R) denounced Bellows’ actions as a form of “voter suppression” that would result in the disenfranchisement of a significant swath of Maine’s electorate.

Republicans also charged Bellows with bias, claiming that she had a conflict of interest that prevented her from acting in good faith on this highly partisan issue. Because Bellows had served as an elector for President Joe Biden in the Electoral College, Representative Michael Soboleski (R) expressed his belief that she could not make an impartial ruling on Trump’s eligibility. “Secretary Bellows should have done the ethical thing and… recused herself,” he said during the House debate.

Defending Bellows, Representative Laura Supica (D) disagreed with Soboleski’s characterization of the secretary and argued that Bellows is a model civil servant, who upholds democracy through bipartisanship, transparency and hard work. “Throughout her time in office, she has gone above and beyond to carry out her duties with integrity and professionalism, often working across the aisle to ensure our democracy is strong. She has a proven record as a public servant, who stands up for free and fair elections,” she stated.

Other Republican lawmakers took issue with Bellows’ ruling because they believe Trump did not incite insurrection and, therefore, is not subject to the Fourteenth Amendment’s disqualification clause. During her speech, Representative Katrina Smith (R) criticized Bellows’ move to bar the former President because “there has been no crime… no impeachment… no conviction [of Trump] in a court of law.”

In an interview with National Public Radio (NPR) on January 2, however, Bellows herself addressed criticism that she cannot disqualify Trump until he is charged with insurrection. “I encourage people to read my decision, and also read very carefully Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment… It doesn’t say ‘convicted’ or ‘impeached,’” she said. 

Another major attack levied by Republican House members against Bellows was that she had overstepped her powers as Maine’s secretary of state and violated established legal procedures and safeguards. In an emotionally charged speech, Representative Edward Polewarczyk (R) said, “What has become of the sovereign state of Maine? Are we no longer required to follow the rule of law?… Innocent until proven guilty has become guilty when accused. Due process is no longer allowed.”

Democrats such as Representative Adam Lee, however, insisted that Bellows had not violated the rule of law. Instead, he argued that Bellows was required by Maine law to issue a ruling on Trump’s eligibility after receiving challenges against his candidacy from Maine voters. In Lee’s speech, he criticized the Republicans’ order for “seek[ing] to impeach the secretary of state for doing a job that our statutes say she — and only she — is required to do. This resolution is before us not because she did anything wrong, but because some of us don’t like her decision… If one is upset that the secretary of state did all of these things [then] your quarrel is not with her. It is with the state legislature in 1985 [and the laws they passed].”

Bellows also defended her ruling from attacks that it violated established legal norms. During her interview with NPR, she said, “In my decision, I made clear this is part of Maine’s process. It now goes to Maine’s Superior Court. Mr. Trump may, and will, appeal to the Superior Court… And I voluntarily suspended the effect of my decision pending that court process, because we are a nation governed by the Constitution and rule of law. And that is extraordinarily important.”