Maine is failing to uphold the Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel for people who cannot afford their own attorney – so we sued. After years of litigation, the Kennebec County Superior Court ruled in favor of the ACLU of Maine.
On January 3, 2025, after years of litigation, the Kennebec County Superior Court ruled that the State of Maine is violating the Sixth Amendment rights of hundreds of people across the state by failing to provide attorneys to people charged with a crime. The court wrote that the “Sixth Amendment demands continuous representation in Maine from the time the right attaches, and at all stages of the criminal process.”
The Sixth Amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees all people charged with a crime the right to effective assistance of counsel. Maine has failed to uphold that promise and remains the only state in the nation that relies almost entirely on private attorneys for this essential public service. The state provides little oversight and resources, tipping the scales of justice against the people. The current system has failed low-income people accused of a crime in Maine and violated their Sixth Amendment right to effective assistance of counsel. A person’s freedom should never depend on their wealth.
We sued the state in 2022, in Robbins v. Maine Commission on Indigent Legal Services. (The case is now named Robbins v. State of Maine.) Since then, the constitutional crisis has only escalated: not only are thousands of people in Maine being denied adequate assistance of counsel, but hundreds of people are not being provided with attorneys at all.
A three-day bench trial was held starting January 22nd, 2025, which included arguments from the ACLU of Maine and the state on proposed remedies for Maine’s widespread failure to provide counsel at all in violation of the Sixth Amendment. We asked the court to order remedies similar to what courts in Massachusetts and Oregon have done when confronted with similar Sixth Amendment crises: If the state does not provide counsel to our class members within seven days, the court should order release from jail with appropriate conditions, and if the state still fails to provide counsel within 45 days, the case should be dismissed without prejudice (meaning the case could be brought again when counsel is available).
On March 7, 2025, the court ruled in favor of the ACLU of Maine and their proposed remedies, and ordered the state to create a plan to end this ongoing constitutional crisis.
If you’re interested in learning more, read on for a detailed history of the case’s twists and turns.
Case History:
July 2022: Class Action Lawsuit
The ACLU of Maine filed this class action lawsuit in state court on behalf of plaintiffs who have been deprived of their constitutional right to the effective assistance of counsel. The court granted the case class-action status in July 2022, allowing our clients to represent a class of thousands of indigent defendants in Maine who are entitled to court-appointed counsel.
The lawsuit alleged that the state’s systemic failures deprive indigent defendants facing criminal proceedings in Maine of their Sixth Amendment right to the effective assistance of counsel. The court rejected the state’s request to dismiss the case. This moved the case forward to pre-trial discovery, allowing us to request written evidence and witness testimony from the state about its indigent defense program.
Fall 2023: Escalating Crisis and Returning to Litigation
Since the lawsuit was originally filed on March 1, 2022, matters have become gravely worse. Not only are thousands of people in Maine being denied adequate assistance of counsel, but hundreds of people are not being provided with attorneys at all.
As a result of this escalating crisis, in March 2024, the court denied the parties’ proposed settlement agreement and ordered the parties to return to litigation on a two-phase schedule. The first phase will focus on whether the state has denied class members the right to counsel by failing to provide them with an attorney. The second phase will focus on the systemic lack of supervision, training, and support that risk leaving people with ineffective assistance of counsel.
Spring 2024: Expanded Claims, Appeal, and Delay
On March 8, we filed an amended lawsuit expanding our claims against the state for denial of the right to counsel. Our amended lawsuit added new facts and legal claims focused on the escalating crisis of people being charged with a crime and then waiting weeks and even months before getting an attorney.
On March 15, the state opposed our motion to expand the lawsuit. Later that same day, the state also filed an appeal asking the Law Court to reverse the court’s order setting the case for trial in June and denying preliminary settlement approval. On May 8, the Law Court denied the state's appeal. The case returned to Kennebec County Superior Court. Due to the state's appeal delaying the case, the trial wouldn't happen in June, as previously scheduled.
Summer 2024: Court Allows Expanded Lawsuit to Proceed, Trial Scheduled for December 2024
On May 23, the court allowed the ACLU of Maine to name the Attorney General and the State of Maine and sue the state over ineffective assistance of counsel, lack of counsel, and unlawful imprisonment.
Our amended lawsuit, filed on May 31, 2024:
- Named the attorney general and the State of Maine as new defendants.
- Updated the factual and legal allegations to address Maine’s worsening crisis. These new allegations focused on the state’s failure to provide attorneys to low-income defendants within a reasonable period after arrest.
- Added unlawful detention (habeas corpus) claims against county sheriffs and the state for unconstitutionally imprisoning indigent defendants without providing counsel.
In June 2024, the Attorney General, the State of Maine, and the Maine Commission on Public Defense Services (formerly the Maine Commission on Indigent Legal Services) asked that the court dismiss the case against them. On August 13, the Kennebec County Superior Court dismissed the Attorney General from the case but allowed the ACLU of Maine to name the ‘State of Maine’ as a defendant, rejecting the state’s claim that it “enjoys absolute immunity.”
Fall 2024: The ACLU files a motion for Summary Judgement.
On November 22nd, 2024, the ACLU of Maine filed a motion for summary judgment, stating that the material facts and evidence in the case were indisputable, and could be ruled on by a judge without going to trial.
January 3rd, 2025: Ruling
On January 3rd, the Kennebec County Superior Court ruled the State of Maine is violating the Sixth Amendment rights of hundreds of people by failing to provide attorneys to people charged with a crime.
The court’s ruling makes it clear: When the state chooses to charge a person with a crime, it is the state's responsibility to provide counsel to those who cannot afford an attorney. The Sixth Amendment demands continuous representation in Maine from the time the right attaches, and at all stages of the criminal process. The State of Maine must remedy this lapse in our constitutional protections.
Read the court's decision here or in the PDF at the bottom of this page.
January 22nd, 2025: Bench Trial
A three-day bench trial was held from January 22nd-25th, which included arguments from the ACLU of Maine and the state on proposed remedies for Maine’s widespread Sixth Amendment violations.
Among several things, the ACLU of Maine asked the court to:
- Declare the Maine Commission on Public Defense Services (MCPDS) is violating the Sixth Amendment
- Order MCPDS to provide counsel from the time a person is charged through all stages of the criminal process, including plea negotiations, bail hearings, and pretrial investigation
- Order MCPDS to submit a detailed plan within 30 days explaining how it will meet its Sixth Amendment obligations
Lastly, we asked for remedies under the habeas corpus clause of the Constitution, which protects people from illegal restrictions on their liberty. We’re asking the Court to order remedies similar to what courts in Massachusetts and Oregon have done when confronted with similar Sixth Amendment crises: If the state does not provide counsel to our class members within seven days, the court should order release from jail with appropriate conditions, and if the state still fails to provide counsel within 45 days, the case should be dismissed without prejudice (meaning the case could be brought again when counsel is available).
March 7, 2025: Ruling
On March 7, 2025, the Kennebec County Superior Court ruled that the state must provide legal counsel to people charged with a crime who cannot afford their own attorney. It ordered the state to create a plan to end this ongoing constitutional crisis.
The court ruled that:
- The Maine Commission on Public Defense Services (MCPDS) has failed to provide counsel “in violation of the Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution.” The court wrote the ACLU of Maine "produced credible and compelling evidence of irreparable harm caused by the MCPDS Defendants’ failure to provide continuous representation at all critical stages of the criminal process.”
- MCPDS must provide continuous legal representation to people charged with a crime and present a plan to the court on how it will do so by April 3, 2025.
- The state must end the illegal detention of people who have been incarcerated for more than 14 days after their initial appearance or arraignment. No person should be incarcerated pretrial – when they are presumed innocent – without their right to counsel.
- The state must dismiss charges, without prejudice, against people who have been denied counsel for more than 60 days after their initial appearance or arraignment. The charges could be brought again once MCPDS is able to provide counsel.
The court has scheduled a hearing for April 7 for defendants to respond to its order.
A Growing Maine Crisis
As of mid-January, 2025, there were nearly 1,000 cases without representation. Over the past year, several hundred people have remained behind bars while being denied their right to an attorney. The people who have been denied counsel are legally innocent, yet many are incarcerated before trial simply because they cannot afford bail. It is always wrong to incarcerate legally innocent people, particularly when they are denied their right to counsel. Click here to take a deeper dive into the staggering statistics that make up this growing crisis.
