Maine’s justice system on display during Fort Kent session
FORT KENT, Maine — The full weight and trappings of Maine’s highest court were on display Thursday, September 8, 2016 as six of the seven Maine Supreme Court justices convened court at the University of Maine at Fort Kent campus.
Despite the lack of marble pillars, the justices heard oral arguments in three cases during the official session.
Since 2005, the court has held oral arguments in actual appellate cases in 32 schools around the state, hearing more than 90 appeals. The students can observe the appellate process in person, and when the cases are decided, the schools receive a link to the court’s written decision to provide to the students.
“I think it’s going to be really interesting,” Kayla Martin, a sophomore at Madawaska Middle / High School, said prior to the start of the session.
Schools from Caribou, Fort Fairfield, Fort Kent, Limestone, Madawaska, St. Agatha and Van Buren all sent groups of students to the session, which took place at UMFK’s Fox Auditorium. For most students like Kayla, who said she was not sure yet if she wanted to be a lawyer, Thursday’s session was the closest they had come to the actual legal process, outside of snippets on television news programs.
Rep. John Martin, D – Eagle Lake, initiated the traveling court program following a discussion several years ago with Chief Justice Hon. Leigh I. Saufley.
“We were concerned about the lack of knowledge about the court system, among young people,” Rep. Martin said following the session. “So I said, let’s tour the state and show them.”
In between oral arguments, Van Buren Secondary School freshman Hannah Simpson said she was not sure she wanted to be a lawyer, but she was still very interested because she wants to be a Maine Game Warden some day.
Cambrin Gurney, a sophomore and fellow Van Buren student, said she did not like to argue and was not particularly interested in becoming a lawyer. “I wouldn’t want to do it. It looks like a lot of work,” Cambrin said with a laugh.
For Saufley, creating more lawyers is not necessarily the point of traveling to high schools each year and giving students a glimpse into the serious and complicated world of appellate jurisprudence.
“We want to encourage students to be part of government themselves, in many ways,” the chief justice said following the session. “As students go out into the world, these civics lessons are important.”
Saufley said students can play important roles at all levels of government and civic structure, not just as lawyers. “It’s critically important they become involved,” she said.
In her opening remarks, Chief Justice Saufley reminded the students the importance of considering the legislative language and intent of each statute bearing on any case, as the job of the high court is – fundamentally – to interpret the law and its application.
During oral arguments, attorneys for both sides of each case were allowed time to present information and were also peppered with questions from the justices, who were all seated on the stage above the audience.
Two cases heard before the court Thursday had some relevancy to this particular group of young citizens.
State of Maine v. Russell Carter involves the solicitation of a 13-year old minor, and Kayla Doherty v. Merck & Co., Inc., et al. involves alleged medical malpractice which led to Doherty, 21 at the time, becoming pregnant and raising her son alone.
The third and final case heard Thursday, State of Maine v. Chad Lagasse, calls into question the burden of probable cause in a 2015 home invasion and drug trafficking case in Caribou.
Once the justices had recessed following the Lagasse case, Lagasse’s father addressed Aroostook County District Attorney Todd Collins, who was representing the State in the case. Lagasse, who was visibly emotional, asked when the police video of his son’s arrest would be released, suggesting that it would show his son was not actually in possession of the drugs at the time.
Mary Ann Lynch, Government & Media Counsel with the court, reminded Legasse that the question period was for students to ask questions about the court and the cases, and not for others to argue the merits of the case.
Issues of constitutionality, precedence, common law, case law, police procedures, tort law and statutory intent were all covered during the more than two-hour session.
Students present in the audience paid attention during each oral argument, and all were respectful of the court.
After each argument, and after the justices had recessed to a room off of the stage, a few students came to the podium to ask the attorneys questions about the cases.
Saufley said seeing students engaged in the process and following the arguments is the most rewarding part of doing the high school sessions.
“They are interested, and they follow along no matter what the topic is,” she said.
Justice Andrew Mead said the sessions are a great opportunity for the students, and as a judge it is enjoyable. “The setting is completely different,” Meade said, “but we still pay attention to every case and oral argument.”
Justice Ellen A. Gorman was unavailable to sit with the court Thursday.
