Source: https://www.scribd.com/document/50544876/MCLU-Appeal-Dennis-Bailey
Timestamp: 2018-03-20 03:21:13
Document Index: 505817510

Matched Legal Cases: ['§ 11002', '§ 1983', '§1014', '§1014', '§5953', '§6051', '§ 11002', '§1983', '§1011', '§ 1014', '§ 1014', '§1014', '§1014', '§1012', '§ 1983', '§ 11007', '§ 1983', '§ 11007', '§ 1983', '§ 1014', '§ 1983', '§1988']

MCLU Appeal Dennis Bailey | News Media | Blog
MCLU Appeal Dennis Bailey
Uploaded by gerald7783
DRAFT #6 – JMRP – 3/7/11 6:53 pm STATE OF MAINE CUMBERLAND, SS DENNIS BAILEY, ) ) Petitioner-Plaintiff ) ) v.
) ) STATE OF MAINE COMMISSION ON ) GOVERNMENTAL ETHICS AND ELECTION ) PRACTICES, and WALTER F. MCKEE, ANDRE ) G. DUCHETTE, MICHAEL T. HEALY, ) MARGARET E. MATHESON and EDWARD ) M. YOUNGBLOOD, in their official capacities ) ) Respondents - Defendants ) SUPERIOR COURT DOCKET NO. ________
PETITION FOR REVIEW AND COMPLAINT
Dennis Bailey brings this appeal for review of final agency action pursuant to Title 5 M.R.S.A. § 11002 and M.R.Civ.P. 80C and this civil action for declaratory and injunctive relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and complains as follows: INTRODUCTION 1. Petitioner-Plaintiff Dennis Bailey (“Bailey”) has a long history of
involvement in Maine politics. In 2009, on his own time and with his own money, he created a website known as “the Cutler Files” in order to share information with the public about Maine gubernatorial candidate Eliot Cutler. The website presented publiclyaccessible information, which Bailey obtained through internet searches and electronic newspaper archives. The research and production of the website, including the internet hosting fee, was approximately $92. The website did not include the name and address of the person who expended those $92, nor did it initially include a disclaimer that this
$92 website was not paid for or authorized by any candidate (though it was not). Because these communications were made through a website, rather than through a newspaper or a broadcast station, and because the communications criticized a gubernatorial candidate by name, but did not contain these disclosures and disclaimers, Mr. Bailey was found in violation of two provisions of Maine election law: 21-A M.R.S.A. §1014(2) and §1014(2-A) and was fined $200. 2. Bailey brings this appeal and civil action for declaratory and injunctive
relief to review the legality, and to challenge the constitutionality, of the commission’s actions as applied to him. This action alleges that the Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices, and its members acting in their official capacities, violated Bailey’s First Amendment right to free expression by penalizing him for engaging in political speech—the most highly-protected form of speech under the First Amendment. PARTIES 3. Bailey is a resident of the Town of Freeport in Cumberland County and
the State of Maine. His principal place of business is in the City of Portland in Cumberland County and the State of Maine. 4. Respondent-Defendant Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and
Election Practices is a state agency charged with investigation and adjudication of alleged violations of election law. 5. Respondents – Defendants Walter F. McKee, Andre G. Duchette, Michael
T. Healy, Margaret E. Matheson and Edward M. Youngblood are members of the Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices and are sued in their official
capacities. (The foregoing individual members and the Maine Commission on Governmental Ethics and Election Practices are hereafter collectively referred to as the “Commission.) JURISDICTION 6. This Court has jurisdiction over this proceeding pursuant to 14 M.R.S.A.
§5953, 14 M.R.S.A. §6051(13), 5 M.R.S.A. § 11002 and 42 U.S.C.A. §1983. BACKGROUND FACTS 7. The State of Maine in 21-A M.R.S.A. §1011-1031 regulates the reporting
of expenditures advocating the election or defeat of political candidates and the publication or distribution of political communications on behalf of candidates for public office in Maine (the “Campaign Reporting Act” Campaign Reporting Act). 8. Section 1014(2) of the Campaign Reporting Act requires that a person
who makes an “expenditure” advocating the election or defeat of a candidate which expenditure is not authorized by a candidate or the candidate’s committee or agent must “clearly and conspicuously state” on the communication that it is “not authorized by any candidate” and the person financing the “expenditure” for the communication must state his or her name and address. 9. Notwithstanding the foregoing general requirement, Section 1012(3)(B)(1)
excludes from the definition of “expenditure” any “news story, commentary or editorial distributed through the facilities of any broadcasting station, newspaper, magazine or other periodical publication” unless the facilities are owned or controlled by a political party or candidate (hereinafter referred to as the “news story exemption”).
Beginning in about June 2010, Bailey was given extensive research
material from a third party on the background of Eliot Cutler who was at that time a candidate for Governor of Maine. The third party research had been done using
publicly accessible internet sites, including online newspaper archives. Bailey confirmed the research after receiving it and added material of his own through his own internet searches. 11. Bailey’s initial intent when he received information about Cutler and then
undertook his own research was to provide information about Cutler’s background to the press – information that the mainstream news media had either not bothered to undertake or publish - in the hope that the press would disseminate the material to the public. After completing his research, Bailey unsuccessfully attempted to share information about Cutler with members of the print and broadcast news media. 12. Had either the print or broadcast news media accepted and published the
material gathered by Bailey and disseminated it through a newspaper, a broadcast station, a magazine, or other “periodical,” any resulting publication of Bailey’s research would have qualified for the “news story exemption” and the Campaign Reporting Act would not have applied to the information gathered or material written by Bailey. 13. Because Bailey does not own or control his own broadcast station,
newspaper, or magazine, and because the mainstream press did not use the information he had gathered, he decided to create his own vehicle, a so-called “blog,” to publicly disseminate the information he had gathered about Eliot Cutler. 14. On or about August 30, 2010, Bailey used the research he had done to
create a blog with the title, “The Secret Files on Eliot Cutler,” (hereinafter, “the Cutler
Files”) which was publicly accessible through the internet at www.cutlerfiles.com. The title was chosen for its dramatic sound, but the information conveyed by the blog was all obtained from public internet sources. The blog also contained photographs and humorous depictions of Cutler to illustrate various points made in the text, not unlike the editorial cartoons of most newspapers. 15. A “blog” is a type of website that generally contains commentary,
graphics, and hyperlinks to other sites. Some blogs are personal chronicles, much like an online publicly-accessible diary, while others are more akin to internet magazines devoted to a particular topic of interest, such as cooking or politics. The Cutler Files was the latter type. Like most blogs, the Cutler Files was regularly updated by Bailey based on his continuing research. 16. The purpose of the Cutler Files was to provide information to the public
about Eliot Cutler which information Bailey believed was being ignored by the mainstream print and broadcast media. 17. Bailey regarded the Cutler Files as an example of citizen journalism, and
the site included factual material, analysis, and opinion. The articles on the Cutler Files website cited numerous reputable sources that contradicted many of the statements made by Cutler and his campaign, raised questions about his explanation and role in the bankruptcy of a company named Thornburg Mortgage, examined his career as a Washington lawyer and lobbyist and provided other information not found in the mainstream print and broadcast news media in Maine.
The total amount spent by Bailey to undertake the research and create and
maintain the Cutler Files website was $91.38. Of that total, Bailey spent about half simply registering and hosting the website online. . 19. When Bailey created the Cutler Files, he did not identify himself as the
person who “financed the expenditure for the communication” on the website nor did he include any statement thatthe blog was “not authorized” by any candidate. . 20. Bailey is well-known in Maine for his work as a reporter for several
Maine newspapers, as press secretary to former U.S. Representative Tom Andrews and former Maine Governor Angus King, as media and policy adviser to former Governor John Baldacci, and as one of the campaign coordinators to a statewide anti-casino campaign. Because he was so well known, Bailey was concerned that his identity would detract from the information contained in the Cutler Files, and that the information contained in the blog would be evaluated in connection with him and his clients, rather than on its own merits, if he was publicly identified with the site. 21. In addition, because Bailey currently makes his living in the public
relations and communications field, he was concerned about personal and economic retaliation if his identity as the author of the Cutler Files was made public. 22. Bailey’s original concern was in fact justified, since following the public
disclosure of his name as one of the authors of the Cutler Files, he has in fact received anonymous threatening phone calls. 23. In light of these well grounded concerns, Bailey made the choice to speak
anonymously through the Cutler Files.
As stated above, the Cutler Files did not initially contain a statement that
it was was not “authorized by” any candidate as purportedly required by 21-A M.R.S.A. § 1014(2). On September 13, 2010 Bailey received notice from the Commission that the failure to include a statement on the Cutler Files website that the site was “not authorized” by any candidate constituted a violation of the Campaign Reporting Act. Thereafter, and within 10 days of receipt of that notice, Bailey added such statement to each page of the Cutler Files blog. 25. 26. The Cutler Files was discontinued on or about October 29, 2010. Bailey was not compensated directly or indirectly for the creation or
maintenance of the Cutler Files. ACTIONS OF THE COMMISSION 27. On September 9, 2010, at the request of Eliot Cutler’s campaign,
Commission opened an investigation into whether the creator of the Cutler Files violated Maine election law. 28. The Commission conducted an extensive investigation, which included
testimony from witnesses, and legal arguments from Bailey’s counsel, counsel for the Cutler campaign, and other interested parties. 29. On December 20, 2010, the Commission reached a preliminary
determination that Bailey had violated 21-A M.R.S.A. §§ 1014(2) and (2-A). On January 27, 2011, the Commission reviewed proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law in support of that determination. 30. On January 31, 2011, the Commission issued a final determination finding
that Bailey had committed two violations of Maine election law through the creation and
maintenance of the Cutler Files. Notice of that final determination was mailed to Bailey and received by Bailey on February 14, 2011. 31. The Commission found that Bailey had violated 21-A M.R.S.A.
§§1014(2) and 1014(2-A) because he did not include his name and address on the website, though this requirement is inconsistent with and irreconcilable with the right to anonymous speech. 32. The Commission also found that Bailey had violated 21-A M.R.S.A.
§1014(2) by not including a disclosure statement declaring that the communication was “not authorized” by any candidate, notwithstanding the fact that Bailey did in fact add such statement to the Cutler Files website within 10 days of receiving notification from the Commission as provided by Section 1014(4). 33. In issuing its decision the Commission refused to construe the “news
story” exemption in 21-A M.R.S.A. §1012(3)(B)(1) liberally to include electronic as well as conventional news media channels, in order to protect Bailey’s constitutional rights. 34. Like the Maine Campaign Reporting Act, Federal election law also
exempts spending on political speech disseminated through newspapers, broadcast stations, magazines, and periodicals from being regarded as an expenditure triggering disclosure or disclaimer requirements. However, unlike the Maine Commission, the Federal Election Commission, which is the federal analogue to the Maine Commission in this case, has interpreted the “news story exemption” in federal law to apply to media entities on the internet, including blogs, websites or any other Internet or electronic publication. 35. As a result of its decision, the Commission fined Bailey $200.
In taking its actions against Bailey, the Commission, as an agency of the
state of Maine, was acting under color of state law. 37. Bailey desires to use a blog or another form of internet communication to
engage in online political speech in the future, including perhaps even anonymous online political speech, but the Commission’s actions have had a chilling effect on his willingness and his ability to do so. 38. Bailey voluntarily added the disclaimers to the Cutler Files blog after he
received notice of a potential violation from the Commission, since he was concerned about potential enforcement action by the Commission. However, Bailey still wishes to engage in anonymous electronic political speech in the future, but the Commission’s actions have had a chilling effect on his willingness and his ability to do so. LEGAL CLAIMS COUNT I 39. 40. Bailey reasserts and realleges the allegations in paragraphs 1 - __. The Campaign Reporting Act as applied to Bailey by the Commission,
and the Commission’s determination that Bailey’s blog was not entitled to the statutory “news story exemption” in Section 1011(3)(B)(1) of the Act, violated Bailey’s rights under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Article I, Section 4 of the Maine Constitution and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. COUNT II 41. 42. Bailey reasserts and realleges the allegations in paragraphs 1 - __. The Commission’s determination that Bailey’s Cutler Files blog was not
entitled to the statutory “news story exemption” in Section 1011(3)(B)(1) of the
Campaign Reporting Act was an error of law, was in excess of statutory authority, and was arbitrary and capricious. Such decision requires reversal under 5 M.R.S.A. § 11007(4)(C) (1), (2) and (4). COUNT III 43. 44. Bailey reasserts and realleges the allegations in paragraphs 1- __. The Campaign Reporting Act as applied to Bailey, and the Commission’s
action ins penalizing Bailey for having made a de minimis expenditure of money to finance his anonymous political speech was in violation of Bailey’s rights under the First Amendment to the United States Constitution, Article I, Section 4 of the Maine Constitution and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. COUNT IV 45. Bailey reasserts and realleges the allegations in paragraphs 1- __.
The action of the Commission in penalizing Bailey for not including a statement in the Cutler Files website stating that the website was “not authorized by a candidate,” despite the fact that Bailey cured this alleged defect within 10 days of receiving notice of the violation from the Commission pursuant to Section 1014(4) of the Campaign Reporting Act, is an error of law and abuse of discretion pursuant to 5 M.R.S.A. § 11007(4)(C) (6).COUNT V 46. 47. Bailey reasserts and realleges the allegations in paragraphs 1- __. The Campaign Reporting Act as applied to Bailey by the Commission,
and the Commission’s determination that Bailey’s blog was not entitled to the statutory “news story exemption” in Section 1011(3)(B)(1) of the Act, violated Bailey’s rights
under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment to the United States Constitution, Article I, Section 6-A of the Maine Constitution and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. PRAYER FOR RELIEF Wherefore, Bailey respectfully prays that this Honorable Court: 1. 11007(4)(C); 2. Declare that the application of Maine’s Campaign Reporting Act to Vacate the judgment of Commission’s decision pursuant to 5 M.R.S.A. §
Bailey’s creation of the Cutler Files is a violation o Bailey’s right to free expression under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 4 of the Maine Constitution and that 21-A M.R.S.A. §§ 1014(2) and 1014(2-A) are unconstitutional as applied to Bailey; 3. Declare that the application of Maine’s Campaign Reporting Act to
Bailey’s creation of the Cutler Files is a violation of Bailey’s right to equal protection of the laws under the 14th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution and Article I, Section 6-A of the Maine Constitution and that the failure to include Bailey’s Cutler Files website within the exemption of Section 1011(3)(B)(1) is unconstitutional as applied to Bailey; 4. U.S.C. § 1983. 5. Permanently enjoin the Commission and its officials, employees, agents, Find that the Commission’s actions against Bailey to be a violation of 42
assigns, and others who may be working in concert with them, from interfering with Bailey’s right to disseminate news and information through a blog or another form of internet communication without triggering disclosure and disclaimer requirements;
Permanently enjoin Commission and its officials, employees, agents,
assigns, and others who may be working in concert with them, from interfering with Bailey’s right to engage in anonymous political speech; 7. §1988; and 8. Grant such other relief as this Court may deem just and appropriate to Award Bailey reasonable costs and attorney fees pursuant to 42 U.S.C.
protect Bailey’s constitutional rights.
_______________________________ Zachary L. Heiden AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION OF MAINE 401 Cumberland Ave., Suite 105 Portland, ME 04101 207-774-5444
Documents Similar To MCLU Appeal Dennis Bailey
comp090121314
Mobilizing Netizens
Editorial Guidelines for the PR Lawyer
Non v. Judge Danes
The Online Times
Blogging Rubric - 5th Grade
Gopo Midterm Study Guide
Robert Zwicker v. James Boll, 391 U.S. 353 (1968)
10662240910998850
Jerald Gere, a Minor by His Father and Next Friend, Paul Gere v. Emory R. Stanley, as Superintendent of Blue Ridge School District, 453 F.2d 205, 3rd Cir. (1971)
american and arizona government curriculum map
NuevoModeloExamenMódulo9
Why Congress Can’t Make A Law Defining Marriage As Between A Man and A Woman
MS Issue 16
Q 4 science
Right to Travel With Warning
South Carolina State Sovereignty H3509 021209
More From gerald7783
MacDonald Letter to Thomaston Blastow
Global Strategy Group Maine 2nd District Poll
Maine Legislative Record 30 June 2015
LePage Madison Paper Letter to Legislature
Rockland Meeting Schedule for Week Ending 11.6.15 Public
Rockland NBZ Ordinance
Maine Gov LePage Judicial Withdrawal Letters 10-20-17
Veto Letters from Gov. Paul LePage
Birth Tourist email to Gov. LePage
LePage Note to Louise
AG OP 2015-07-10 Adjournments and Vetoes
Typical End of Maine Legislative Session
LePage Veto Letters for Bills Sponsored by Democrats
21 Vetoes by Gov. Paul LePage 19 June 2015
LePage Letter to President Obama Re Proposed National Park
Typical schedule for Maine gubernatorial candidate Rep. Mike Michaud
Al DiMillo Review of Gov LePage Tax Scheme
Statement from Bruce Poliquin regarding District 2 debates
Letter from Maine legislative leaders and Dept of Labor to Verso Paper regarding severance pay
E2Tech Energy Forum Schedule
DHHS FedEx Receipt Little Rock
Maine Women's Lobby Dench Confirmation Testimony
Rockland Waterfront Redevelopment Plan
Mayhew Response to FNS Photo EBT
Christian Civic League of Maine says Cain holding an "Abortion Celebration"
Letter from Cathy Breen to Maine Senate
Gov. LePage Letter to Rep. Michaud re Transportation Funding
Sens. Alfond/Hill letter to Senate President Thibodeau re Sen Willette