Rep. Laurel Libby, a Republican from Auburn, talks to a small group about what testifying against a bill at the State House will look like during a Speak Up for Life event at New City Church in Bath in March 2023. Brianna Soukup/Portland Press Herald

All six of Maine’s active federal judges have recused themselves from a Republican state lawmaker’s lawsuit against the speaker of the House.

Rep. Laurel Libby, R-Auburn, and six of her constituents filed the suit in U.S. District Court in Bangor on Tuesday in response to Libby’s party-line censure by the Legislature last month.

Democrats argued Libby crossed a line by including photos of a transgender high school athlete as part of her criticism of Maine’s policy of allowing transgender athletes to compete in girls sports.

In an unusual move, Chief U.S. District Judge Lance Walker issued a statement Wednesday night explaining that the recusals occurred because a court employee has a connection to the case.

Libby’s lawsuit against Democratic Speaker of the House Ryan Fecteau and House clerk Robert Hunt has now been assigned to U.S. District Judge Melissa R. DuBose of Rhode Island, who will be assisted by Magistrate Patricia Sullivan of Rhode Island. The case will still be heard in Maine, according to an order Walker issued Wednesday morning.

“The recusal of all the judges on this court gives rise to an ‘emergency,’” Walker wrote, citing a federal law over judges. Maine has an agreement with New Hampshire and Rhode Island that allows the courts to send and receive cases when judges aren’t locally available.

House Speaker Ryan Fecteau, D-Biddeford, speaks during first day of the 2025 legislative session in January. Joe Phelan/Kennebec Journal

Walker noted that the court typically avoids commenting on its orders, but cited “circumstances unique to this case” in the written statement he issued just before 7 p.m. Wednesday.

“The Judges of the District of Maine independently concluded that they are compelled by the Code of Conduct for United States Judges to recuse themselves because an employee of the District of Maine is involved in or directly impacted by the controversy underlying this litigation,” he said.

Under federal law, judges have a broad ability to remove themselves from any case where there could be a potential conflict. They’re obligated to step away from a case if they have a personal bias against a party, have personal knowledge of disputed facts, were an attorney for the matter in controversy, have a financial interest in a controversy, or have a spouse involved in a case.

Judges are not required, however, to offer any insight into their decision. They have the option to suggest there is a potential conflict and give the parties a chance to decide for themselves if a judge can be impartial. They can also explain why they might choose not to recuse themselves, if challenged to do so.

The decision to recuse by Maine’s entire active federal bench — who have been nominated under both Democratic and Republican administrations — is unusual.

A RARE OCCURRENCE

“It’s rare but not rarer than you would think,” said Professor Carl Tobias from the University of Richmond School of Law, who follows judicial happenings around the country.

He said this is more common in places with a smaller number of judges and that’s why there is a legal process in place to bring in judges from other states.

Dmitry Bam, a professor at the University of Maine School of Law, said Wednesday that he has never seen the entire court make such a move. He has seen instances in Maine and other states where more than one judge will move to recuse themselves from cases where they have a financial interest (like those involving waterfront property), but never a full court.

“The typical case would be a financial conflict … or some are political,” said Tobias. “The way this dispute is described, it seems like it just may be too hot to handle for the Maine judges. They may just know too many people and feel like it’s very political, and it’s something they don’t want to be involved in — even if they don’t (recuse themselves from) taking on any other controversial cases.”

Recusals can help judges avoid a perception of bias, Bam said. But even though there’s no obligation to disclose their reason for recusals, he said the lack of clarity might be problematic for the people involved in the case, future judges weighing similar issues and the public.

“I think, just kind of from the public perception, I don’t know — is it going to create public confidence that these judges are so cautious that they all stepped aside? Or does it kind of go the other way, where the public might have skepticism?” Bam said.

Libby and her attorney, Patrick Strawbridge, were not aware Tuesday, after the first set of judges had recused themselves, what their reasoning was.

“This many recusals are quite unusual, but because none of the judges have specified the reason they are refusing, I am unable to provide any insight or comment on it,” Strawbridge said before Walker released his statement Wednesday night.

A spokesperson for Fecteau declined through a spokesperson to talk about the recusals. He has until April 1 to file a response to Libby’s complaint with the court. The Office of the Maine Attorney General, which is defending Fecteau, said it does not comment on pending litigation.

Staff Writers Rachel Ohm and Daniel Kool contributed to this report.