Advocates make case for red flag ballot measure in last-minute legislative hearing
Dozens of people gathered at the State House Wednesday to discuss stricter gun safety regulations that Mainers will be voting on this November.
After a failed legislative attempt last year to implement a so-called 'red flag law' — which would allow courts to temporarily take guns away from people perceived as a threat by law enforcement or their family members — a citizen-led initiative collected more than 80,000 signatures to put a referendum question on the ballot for this year.
But before the question goes to voters in November, the Legislature is required to hold a public hearing for the referendum: LD 1378. Wednesday's meeting came after Republicans repeatedly questioned why a public hearing was never scheduled for the proposal.
After pleas from Republicans, last-minute hearing scheduled for red flag initiative
Red flag laws, formally known as extreme risk protection orders, are active in twenty-one states, including four states in New England. Maine is the only state with a yellow flag law.
The referendum proposes allowing a family member, household member or law enforcement officer to file a petition, along with an affidavit of facts, for an extreme risk protection order if someone is suspected of posing a significant danger of causing physical injury to themself or another person. That protection order would prohibit the person from purchasing, possessing or controlling a 'dangerous weapon.'
A court would be required to schedule a hearing within 14 days of when the petition is filed. If the court finds the individual does pose a significant risk of causing physical injury, the court must issue an order prohibiting them from purchasing, possessing or receiving a dangerous weapon for up to one year. The person would need to immediately surrender any dangerous weapons in their possession to law enforcement.
A person could request to have the order terminated if they can show evidence that they no longer pose a risk of physical harm. Conversely, an order can also be renewed for up to one additional year.
At the hearing, about 30 speakers highlighted flaws in Maine's current 'yellow flag law,' which allows law enforcement to take guns away from people after a mental health evaluation. Family members of people who died in the October 2023 mass shooting in Lewiston as well as doctors, psychiatrists and school teachers all pointed to issues with the yellow flag law, arguing that stricter regulations could have helped prevent the shooting.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
'I get regular calls from people who are desperate for help when a loved one or others are in crisis, who are dangerous and harmful firearms that are not getting help from the police. I have to explain to them that there's nothing that I can do as an individual on this kind of advocacy,' said Nacole Palmer, executive director of the Maine Gun Safety Coalition, which collected signatures for the citizen initiative.
'But there's something that we can all do together this November by passing this proven, life-saving law that empowers family members and will help keep our schools and communities safe,' she added.
Mental health professionals and doctors from several national organizations said the current law's required mental health evaluation weakens it.
'Ultimately, family members know their loved ones best. They are first to notice when something is wrong and when someone they love is wrong,' said Madeleine DesFosses, speaking on behalf of the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Maine Medical Association. 'We need to ensure that an efficient process is available, and that makes it easier to get dangerous weapons away from someone.'
Critics of the bill included members of law enforcement, who said the yellow flag law is working well and that allowing courts to directly take away weapons makes enforcement of the red flag law more dangerous for law enforcement officers who have to confiscate them. Some opponents also argued that it's unconstitutional and lacks due process.
If the referendum passes, it would not replace Maine's current law, but would be an additional tool police or the general public can use to temporarily confiscate weapons. But Lt. Michael Johnston of the Maine State Police argued that having two different avenues is unnecessary, since the current system is working well, as evidenced by the increase in frequency of use.
Maine medical community backs proposed red flag law
'I think this is going to be a heightened risk of service for law enforcement and for the respondent,' Johnston said, testifying in opposition to the referendum. 'You get diminished returns if you have similar processes in place, people aren't sure which ones to take advantage of.'
The public hearing included lengthy discussion on the effectiveness and barriers of the current law. Since the Lewiston shooting, the use of the yellow flag law has skyrocketed. Law enforcement used it more times in the first two months of this year than the first three years after its passing in 2020. So far, there have been 881 total applications, 800 of which were after the October 2023 shooting, according to Maine State Police. Johnston said he is only aware of two times that state police were unsuccessful in temporarily confiscating weapons under the yellow flag law rules.
But that use remains high because the yellow flag law 'failed so spectacularly that 18 Mainers were slaughtered,' Palmer said. 'And the people of Maine, including our law enforcement, are so desperate to make sure that kind of thing doesn't happen again.'
Johnston said 'Lewiston was a wake up call for everyone,' and that law enforcement is already focused on better training and implementation of the yellow flag law. Adding another tool that doesn't work as well to the tool chest, he said, 'can detract or diminish from what's already working.'
Similar legislation was introduced last session, but it died without a vote in the full Senate or House of Representatives.
That bill was sponsored by Sen. Rachel Talbot Ross (D-Cumberland), who at the time was speaker of the House. A lengthy budget debate on the last day of the session upended plans for the chambers to take it up.
At the time, the measure was particularly popular among Maine's medical community which praised the proposal for its efforts to address the public health crisis of gun violence without stigmatizing mental illness.
Like last year's proposal, the red flag bill heard Wednesday is up against the legislative clock. Though lawmakers are no longer beholden to the statutory adjournment date of June 18, given that they are technically in a special session, leaders have indicated they intend to stick with that deadline.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Bloomberg
9 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
Hakeem Jeffries to Visit Texas as Trump Pushes Redrawing Congressional Maps
Hakeem Jeffries, the Democratic leader in the US House of Representatives, will meet with Texas Democrats in Austin on Wednesday, according to people familiar with the matter, as a national battle intensifies over President Donald Trump's drive to redraw the state's congressional maps. Trump has said that revamping Texas congressional districts would add as many as five seats for the Republicans, giving the party a leg up as it seeks to defend its narrow House majority in midterm elections next year. Texas state lawmakers have been holding hearings on the controversial effort, but new proposed maps have yet to be released.


Fox News
9 minutes ago
- Fox News
Vance warns of 'penalty' for Dems who opposed the 'big, beautiful, bill' ahead of 2026 midterms
Vice President JD Vance said that anyone who opposed President Donald Trump's "one big, beautiful bill" should face consequences ahead of the 2026 midterm elections. The measure includes key provisions that would permanently establish individual and business tax breaks included in Trump's 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, and incorporates new tax deductions to cut duties on tips and overtime pay. All Democrats, along with five Republicans in both the House and the Senate, voted against the massive tax and domestic policy bill. However, Trump signed it into law on July 4. "Anybody who voted against it, I think they ought to pay a penalty," Vance said Monday in Canton, Ohio. "Because they voted against all those great things for the people of Akron and the people of Northeastern Ohio." "The craziest thing is if you're a Democrat and you don't like this legislation, then come and talk to us," Vance said. "Make some proposed changes. Tell us 'You know, this provision isn't so good. We'd like to change it a little bit, and if we change it, then I can get to yes.' This is the process of government. And these guys didn't even come to the White House and try to make their concerns known. They didn't try to make the legislation better. They just attack, attack, attack." Vance then said he believed Democrats don't care about grocery prices, whether employees receive a raise or not, or if Americans are even employed in the first place. "Their obsession in government is letting illegal aliens into this country, and attacking Donald J. Trump," Vance said. "I don't think the American people should reward that broken style of politics, and I don't think they're going to come November 2026." Vance's remarks come as he champions the "big, beautiful bill," with Republicans looking to defend their slim House majority — and potentially pick up a few seats — in the high-stakes 2026 midterm elections. Vance visited Pennsylvania's 8th District on July 16, when he praised the measure and offered support for the district's Republican representative, Rep. Rob Bresnahan, who was elected in 2024 and is in a vulnerable seat. Vance is also slated to speak at fundraisers for the Republican National Committee on Tuesday in Jackson Hole, Wyoming, and Big Sky, Montana, Axios first reported. Among those who voted against the "big, beautiful bill" in Ohio was Rep. Emilia Sykes, who represents Canton, where Vance spoke on Monday. Sykes is in a vulnerable district as well and barely secured a victory over her opponent in the 2024 election by 2.2 percentage points, according to The New York Times. A spokesperson for Vance doubled down on the vice president's remarks on Monday and pointed to a new Wall Street Journal poll released on Friday that found that 63% of voters hold a negative view towards Democrats, and only 33% hold a favorable one – a new low since 1990. "The Democrats just hit their lowest approval rating in 35 years, and all they can do is distract voters from the enormous wins the Trump administration is racking up," a Vance spokesperson said in a statement to Fox News Digital. "Voters are sick of Democrat politicians constantly blowing hot air. Meanwhile, the vice president is visiting contested House districts around the country selling the substantive provisions in the president's landmark One Big Beautiful Bill." A Fox News poll released this month revealed that a majority of voters oppose the "big, beautiful bill." The poll, which was conducted between July 18 and 21, found that 58% of all registered voters oppose the measure, while 39% approve of it. No Democrats got on board backing the "big, beautiful bill," joined by Republican Sens. Susan Collins of Maine, Thom Tillis of North Carolina, and Rand Paul of Kentucky and Republican Reps. Thomas Massie of Kentucky and Brian Fitzpatrick of Pennsylvania. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries, D-N.Y., labeled the bill "cruel" during floor remarks that lasted hours on July 3, pointing to Medicaid and SNAP reforms that reports suggest would remove millions of beneficiaries from the programs. "What is contemplated in this one big, ugly bill is wrong. It's dangerous, and it's cruel, and cruelty should not be either the objective or the outcome of legislation that we consider here in the United States House of Representatives," Jeffries said.


Politico
9 minutes ago
- Politico
Ghislaine Maxwell plays hardball with lawmakers on giving Epstein testimony
Ghislaine Maxwell, a convicted co-conspirator of the deceased sex offender Jeffrey Epstein, is asking to postpone her scheduled congressional deposition — and making a series of other demands as conditions of her cooperation with Hill investigators. It comes following a recent vote by a House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee to subpoena Maxwell amid mounting pressure from House Republicans to release materials related to the larger Epstein investigation. Full committee chair James Comer (R-Ky.) subsequently sent a letter to Maxwell, who is in prison, compelling her to speak with the committee on Aug. 11. Maxwell's attorneys indicated last week she was declining to cooperate with the subpoena. But in a letter obtained Tuesday by POLITICO, the lawyers noted their client now wants to reach a compromise to facilitate her testimony. Among her asks is to be granted immunity from further criminal proceedings; to receive committee investigators' questions in advance of the interview; to delay the deposition until after her appeals; and to relocate the deposition outside the prison where Maxwell is held. Otherwise, the attorneys wrote, Maxwell will invoke her Fifth Amendment right. 'We remain open to working with the Committee to find a path forward that respects her constitutional rights and enables her to assist the American people and the Committee in its important oversight mission,' the attorneys wrote. A spokesperson for the House Oversight Committee said the panel would soon respond to Maxwell's request but would not consider granting her Congressional immunity. Many House Republicans have been pushing Comer and GOP leaders to make the interview with Maxwell as public as possible. According to three Republicans with direct knowledge of the talks, members worry the closed-door setting — and the possibility of granting her some level of immunity — would only increase distrust among their constituents who've been pressing for answers relating to Epstein's activities. Meredith Lee Hill contributed to this report.