An Act To Protect Maine Laws under the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Maine
Maine Legislature, Session 125, LD 1076
Committee: Judiciary
Sponsors: WATERHOUSE, CEBRA, O'CONNOR, SARTY, SIROCKI, HASTINGS, PLOWMAN

Legislative Document 
No. 1076 
H.P. 811 
House of Representatives, March 15, 2011 
An Act To Protect Maine Laws under the United States Constitution 
and the Constitution of Maine 
Reference to the Committee on Judiciary suggested and ordered printed. 
HEATHER J.R. PRIEST 
Clerk 
Presented by Representative WATERHOUSE of Bridgton. 
Cosponsored by Representatives: CEBRA of Naples, O'CONNOR of Berwick, SARTY of 
Denmark, SIROCKI of Scarborough, Senators: HASTINGS of Oxford, PLOWMAN of 
Penobscot. 
Be it enacted by the People of the State of Maine as follows: 
Sec. 1.  14 MRSA c. 14 is enacted to read: 
CHAPTER 14 
APPLICATION OF FOREIGN LAW 
§351.  Findings 
While the Legislature fully recognizes the right to contract freely under the laws of 
this State, it also recognizes that this right may be reasonably and rationally 
circumscribed pursuant to the State's interest to protect and promote rights and privileges 
granted under the United States Constitution and the Constitution of Maine. 
§352.  Foreign law, legal code or system defined 
As used in this chapter, "foreign law, legal code or system" means any law, legal 
code or legal system of a jurisdiction outside of any state or territory of the United States, 
including, but not limited to, international organizations and tribunals, that is applied by 
that jurisdiction's courts, administrative bodies or other formal or informal tribunals. 
§353.  Comity to foreign decision 
The primary factor that a court, administrative agency, arbitrator, mediator or other 
entity or person acting under the authority of state law must consider in granting comity 
to a decision rendered under a foreign law, legal code or legal system against a natural 
person in this State is whether the decision rendered either violated or would violate any 
right of the natural person in this State guaranteed by the Constitution of Maine or the 
United States Constitution or any statute or decision under those constitutions. 
§354.  Choice of law 
1.  Preservation of constitutional rights.  If a contract, arbitration agreement or 
other agreement provides for the choice of a foreign law, legal code or legal system to 
govern its interpretation or the resolution of any claim or dispute and if the enforcement 
or interpretation of the contract, arbitration agreement or other agreement applying that 
choice of law provision either resulted or would result in a violation of any right 
guaranteed by the Constitution of Maine or the United States Constitution, the primary 
factor in interpretation, enforcement or application of the contract, arbitration agreement 
or other agreement is preservation of the constitutional rights of the natural person in this 
State against whom enforcement is sought, unless otherwise directed by state law. 
2.  Voluntary restriction or limitation.  This chapter may not be interpreted to limit 
the right of a natural person of this State to voluntarily restrict or limit that person's own 
constitutional rights by contract or specific waiver consistent with constitutional 
principles; however, the language of any such contract or other waiver must be strictly 
construed in favor of preserving the constitutional rights of the natural person in this 
State. 
§355.  Choice of venue or forum 
1.  Preservation of constitutional rights.  If any contract, arbitration agreement or 
other agreement provides for the choice of venue or forum outside any state or territory of 
the United States and if the enforcement or interpretation of the contract, arbitration 
agreement or other agreement applying that choice of venue or forum provision either 
resulted or would result in a violation of any right of a natural person in this State 
guaranteed by the Constitution of Maine or the United States Constitution, in interpreting 
or construing the contract or arbitration agreement or other agreement, the primary factor 
to be considered is whether the contract, arbitration agreement or other agreement can be 
interpreted or construed to preserve the constitutional rights of the natural person in this 
State against whom enforcement is sought. 
2.  Denial of claim.  If a natural person of this State, subject to personal jurisdiction 
in this State, seeks to maintain litigation, arbitration, agency or similarly binding 
proceedings in this State and if the courts of this State find that granting a claim of forum 
non conveniens or a related claim violates or would likely violate the constitutional rights 
of the nonclaimant in the foreign forum with respect to the matter in dispute, the claim 
must be denied. 
§356.  Application 
1.  Corporation, partnership or other business entity.  This chapter does not apply 
to a corporation, partnership, limited liability corporation, professional corporation or any 
other legal business entity recognized under the laws of the State. 
2.  Actual or foreseeable violations.  This chapter applies only to actual or to 
foreseeable violations of constitutional rights of a natural person in this State from a 
foreign law, legal code or legal system. 
SUMMARY 
This bill is based on Tennessee Public Acts, 2010, Public Chapter Number 983.  The 
bill addresses the application of foreign law in this State. 
The bill provides that the factor in considering whether to grant comity to a decision 
rendered under any foreign law, legal code or legal system against a natural person in this 
State is whether the constitutional rights under the United States Constitution and the 
Constitution of Maine of the person would be protected.  Similarly, if a contract or other 
agreement provides for the choice of a foreign law, legal code or legal system, the 
primary factor in the interpretation, enforcement or application of the agreement is the 
preservation of the constitutional rights of the natural person in this State.  The right of a 
natural person to voluntarily restrict or limit that person's own constitutional rights 
consistent with constitutional principles is not limited by the bill; however, a contract or 
specific waiver restricting or limiting rights must be strictly construed in favor of 
preserving the constitutional rights of the natural person. 
The bill provides that the primary factor to be considered in interpreting or construing 
a choice of venue or forum provision is whether it can be interpreted or construed to 
preserve the constitutional rights of the natural person in this State against whom 
enforcement is sought.  A claim for forum non conveniens or a related claim must be 
denied if the court determines that granting the claim violates or would likely violate the 
constitutional rights of the nonclaimant in the foreign forum with respect to the matter in 
dispute. 
The bill does not apply to a corporation, partnership or other legal business entity. 
The bill applies only to actual or to foreseeable violations of the constitutional rights 
of a natural person in this State from a foreign law, legal code or legal system.