Opinion of the Justices

Summary

The Maine Supreme Judicial Court issued an advisory opinion in response to three questions propounded by the Maine Senate concerning the constitutionality of Maine's Ranked-Choice Voting Act. The questions addressed centralized vote counting, the plurality-vote requirements in the Maine Constitution, and the statutory method for resolving gubernatorial ties. The opinion discusses the constitutional prerequisites and limits governing advisory opinions under Article VI, Section 3 of the Maine Constitution.

Holdings

1. Question 2 presented an important question of law and a solemn occasion under article VI, section 3 of the Maine Constitution because the issue was serious, immediate, unusually exigent, sufficiently precise, and implicated substantial uncertainty in the administration of upcoming elections.
2. Yes. The Ranked-Choice Voting Act conflicts with the Maine Constitution because it does not declare the candidate who first receives a plurality of all votes returned to be the winner; instead, it requires additional rounds of tabulation and elimination until a majority is achieved or ballots are exhausted.
3. No. Questions 1 and 3 did not present a solemn occasion because the Justices' answer to Question 2 resolved the central constitutional conflict and made further advice unnecessary.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the Ranked-Choice Voting Act's ranked-choice tabulation method conflicts with the Maine Constitution's plurality requirements for Governor, State Senator, and State Representative.
2. Whether the Act's central counting process conflicts with constitutional provisions assigning municipal officials responsibility for sorting, counting, declaring, and recording votes.
3. Whether the Act's provision for resolving a gubernatorial tie by lot conflicts with the Maine Constitution's provision requiring the House and Senate to resolve such a tie.

Disposition

other