Court Preserves Landmark Victory for Disability Rights in Maine

Earlier this year, the State of Maine and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) asked the U.S. District Court for District of Maine to modify the settlement reached just last year in United States v. Maine. The court’s order ensures that essential independent oversight will remain in place to guarantee hundreds of Maine children receive the integrated, community-based care they are legally entitled to under federal civil rights law.

The Department of Justice filed the original lawsuit in September 2024. DOJ alleged that the State of Maine was violating the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). It asserted that the State was unnecessarily segregating children with behavioral health disabilities in institutions, separating them from their families and communities. This practice, known as unlawful institutionalization, violates the ADA's mandate to serve individuals in the most integrated setting appropriate for their needs.

The State's longstanding failure to provide behavioral health services for children in their homes and communities is not just a matter of bad policy: it is a profound civil rights issue. Children have a basic right to live and thrive in their homes and communities.

In November 2024, the State of Maine and DOJ reached a comprehensive settlement agreement designed to fundamentally restructure Maine's children's behavioral health system. The goal was to build a robust, community-based health network that allows children to live at home and in their communities – rather than in institutions such as hospitals, emergency rooms, and the state's youth detention center (Long Creek).

A cornerstone of this agreement was the creation of an "Independent Reviewer" position. The reviewer was established to act as an external, expert monitor, tasked with:

• Approving Maine's implementation plan
• Providing technical assistance and expertise
• Assessing compliance through site visits and data analysis
• Reporting directly to the court on the state's progress (or lack thereof)

Less than a year after the settlement, the State and DOJ jointly requested that the court modify the agreement and reduce accountability. They sought to eliminate the independent reviewer entirely and weaken additional settlement commitments. Their argument was that the independent reviewer was no longer necessary.

The ACLU of Maine, along with Disability Rights Maine, GLAD Law, and the Center for Public Representation, quickly filed an amicus curiae (friend of the court) brief opposing these changes. We argued that removing the independent reviewer would be a devastating blow to accountability. Without the reviewer, the State would effectively be monitoring itself, undermining the settlement's very purpose and endangering the children who depend on it.

The court ultimately sided with our coalition and preserved the settlement agreement. The court maintains ongoing authority over the agreement and ruled that the State and DOJ failed to meet the high legal bar to modify a settlement agreement under court oversight. The court's decision protects this key victory and confirms that outside monitoring is essential. The judge recognized that the independent reviewer was a core part of the original deal and is the necessary tool to ensure Maine actually implements systemic reforms and protects the legal rights of children with disabilities.

This decision is a powerful reminder that:

• Independent Oversight is Essential: When civil rights are at stake, external accountability mechanisms are not optional; they are a necessary safeguard against systemic failure.
• The ADA's Promise Must Be Kept: Children's right to live and thrive in their community is a fundamental right that must be continuously defended.