Maine Silences Rep Who’s Fighting for No Males in Girl’s Sports

16
3678

The Maine House of Representatives voted to censure Rep. Laurel Libby (R-Auburn). Allegedly, the censure is for posting photographs and details about a boy pretending to be a girl so he can compete as a girl. She put the photos on her legislative page. That’s only the excuse for censure, forbidding the representative to speak or write freely. The real reason is they want biological males competing with females in sports. And they don’t want notoriety over it.

They wouldn’t let her speak in the Maine House before the censure, constantly interrupting her.

Attorney General Pam Bondi has threatened to sue.

Days after the post, President Donald Trump threatened to withhold funding from Maine for not complying with his executive order seeking to ban transgender women from competing in sports that correspond with their gender identity. They needn’t blame her. He plans to do it nationwide.

After the 75-70 vote Tuesday night to censure — an official statement of condemnation by the Legislature — Libby declined to submit an apology to the body, meaning she is in violation of the House rules and therefore unable to cast a vote or speak on the floor until she complies.

This is what they think is ok: a big male grifter stealing the more delicate woman’s titles:

“I urge you, and indeed every member of this body, to recommit to keeping kids out of the political fray as has long been observed in both our state and federal politic,” Speaker of the House Ryan Fecteau (D-Biddeford) said to Libby after the vote. “Maine kids and all Maine people deserve better.”

They not only silenced her. They want her to take the post down and not express her views online. Finally, they demand she humiliate herself for the right to speak and write about an issue.

House Minority Leader Billy Bob Faulkingham (R-Winter Harbor) argued the code of ethics does not refer to online or social media posts, and that Libby’s post also didn’t violate Facebook’s community standards.

“This censure motion makes a mockery of the censure process,” Faulkingham said. “It sets a standard that says that the majority party, when they’re displeased with a social media post that upsets them, can censure a member of the minority party, and by a majority vote, censure them.”

In a statement issued after the vote, Faulkingham also accused Democrats of using what he referred to as a “sham” censure to distract from the supplemental budget proposal to address an imminent Medicaid funding shortfall that is currently still in limbo.


Subscribe to the Daily Newsletter

PowerInbox
5 3 votes
Article Rating
Subscribe
Notify of
guest
16 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments