AUGUSTA (AP) — Maine’s highest court said Thursday it will not respond to lawmakers’ questions about state Treasurer Bruce Poliquin’s personal business dealings and finances because the queries do not constitute the “solemn occasion” needed to render an advisory opinion.
In doing so, the Supreme Judicial Court sidestepped an issue that has strong political implications in an election year. Questions about Republican Poliquin’s business activities while he serves as treasurer were first raised by Democrats. Poliquin, a former candidate for governor, is now one of six candidates vying for the GOP nomination for the U.S. Senate seat being vacated by Olympia Snowe.
Democratic Rep. Mark Dion of Portland raised the issue in January when he asked Attorney General William Schneider — now also a Senate hopeful — whether the state constitution prohibits Maine’s treasurer from engaging in “any business of trade or commerce” while serving in office. Dion pointed to records showing Poliquin is “clerk and registered agent” of a company that markets condominiums in Phippsburg and is the owner of the Popham Beach Club.
Schneider said Poliquin should “disassociate” himself from businesses.
Dion later took the issue to the House, which in early March voted to pose Republican approved questions to the court. The House asked the high court whether Poliquin’s ownership of stocks or business interests is addressed by the constitution, whether he would be in violation of the constitution if he did not engage in day-to-day business activities, and if his business activities would invalidate actions he’d taken a treasurer.
In their response, the justices said the questions “present too broad a range of potential factual and legal possibilities,” and “do not present a matter of live gravity.”
Comments are not available on this story. Read more about why we allow commenting on some stories and not on others.
We believe it's important to offer commenting on certain stories as a benefit to our readers. At its best, our comments sections can be a productive platform for readers to engage with our journalism, offer thoughts on coverage and issues, and drive conversation in a respectful, solutions-based way. It's a form of open discourse that can be useful to our community, public officials, journalists and others.
We do not enable comments on everything — exceptions include most crime stories, and coverage involving personal tragedy or sensitive issues that invite personal attacks instead of thoughtful discussion.
You can read more here about our commenting policy and terms of use. More information is also found on our FAQs.
Show less