The legal battle over what one lawyer called “the most famous piece of artwork in Maine” moved Monday to Boston, where the First U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard arguments over the removal of a mural depicting the state’s labor history.
The 11-panel mural features women shipbuilders during World War II, the 1986 International Paper strike in Jay, child laborers and part-time Maine resident Frances Perkins, who as President Franklin D. Roosevelt’s labor secretary was integral to the creation of a minimum wage, Social Security and other aspects of Roosevelt’s New Deal.
Gov. Paul LePage ordered the mural removed in March 2011 because he said it presented a one-sided view of history and was not in keeping with the pro-business message of his administration. U.S. District Judge John Woodcock ruled earlier this year that the mural constituted “government speech” and the governor was within his rights to remove it.
Monday’s hearing was an appeal of his decision.
The three-judge panel considering the case is made up of Sandra Lynch, Michael Boudin and Douglas Woodlock, all of Boston. Lynch and Bowden are appellate judges. Woodlock is a U.S. District Court judge in Boston.
District court judges may be appointed to hear cases on appeal by the chief judges of the circuit courts. Lynch, who serves as chief judge of the First Circuit, appointed Woodlock to serve on the panel.
A podcast of the oral arguments was posted on the appellate court’s website late Monday afternoon.
“What the government is saying is that it doesn’t want to be associated with the message of the mural in that space that a reasonable person could take away from the mural,” Lynch said to Jeffrey Young, the Portland attorney for the plaintiffs, a group of artists and labor advocates. “[The government is] making a choice not to be associated with the speech that it owns, the expression that it owns — something it bought and paid for.”
Young said it does not matter how the mural was paid for or who owns it. What is important it that it was displayed in a public space.
“Viewers have the same right under the First Amendment that the artist has to display the art,” the attorney said. “There is a long history in Maine of art being displayed in public buildings and people understand that it is not the artwork of the government but the artist.”
Judge Boudin said the place and context in which the art was displayed could influence how people experienced or interpreted it.
“Obviously if you see a mural signed by somebody, you know it was not painted by the government,” Boudin said. “Depending on where it was hung and the relationship to the content [of the artwork], it could be an expression of government.”
Deputy Maine Attorney General Paul Stern said that Young and his clients’ concern was not the First Amendment.
“The plaintiffs really don’t want free speech here,” he said. “What they want is speech that they like to be there for as long as possible.”
Stern suggested that a mural depicting L.L. Bean showing the number of jobs he created over the past century in the state of Maine could replace the artwork that had been removed.
“Now, this is the most famous art in the state of Maine,” he said of the labor mural. “The state is not saying it doesn’t want this seen. It’s saying it doesn’t want it seen in this small waiting room where people going into workers’ compensation hearings have to look at it.”
Under some circumstances, the labor mural could appear to be critical of how business has been conducted in Maine, Stern said.
The lawsuit that sparked the appeal was filed in April 2011 in federal court in Bangor.
The plaintiffs are Don Berry of Sumner, president of the Maine AFL-CIO; John Newton, an industrial hygienist of Portland; and three Maine artists: Robert Shetterly of Brooksville, Natasha Mayers of Whitefield and Joan Braun of Weld.
Artist Judy Taylor, who created the mural, is not a party to the lawsuit.
The plaintiffs are asking the appellate court to reverse Woodcock’s decision and send the case back to federal court in Bangor for a trial before a jury.
There is no timetable under which the court must issue a decision.
To listen to oral arguments in the case, visit http://www.ca1.uscourts.gov/files/audio/12-1472.mp3.
Replace the Maine House and Senate majorities with Democratic leadership tomorrow and this whole ordeal including LePage himself will be all but over. Get out there and VOTE!
Vote for revenge!
If you had an R next to your name on the ballot, you didn’t make the cut, immediate elimination.
Ironically, it is LePage himself who made this artwork famous, and that was the last thing he wanted to do.
I have to disagree. I think that LePage probably feels that this is a reflection of his own importance.
As usual, liberals wasting taxpayers money…
Actually – that argument makes no sense in this situation. It was Penguin himself who chose to make an issue out of the mural – without his amateurish impulse to take this thing down, it never would have been an issue. He has only himself to thank for the incredible waste of time and money this has become.
Agreed. It was a unilateral, personal decision on his part, not “government speech,” whatever the heck that is. He should personally reimburse the $65,000 to the unemployment fund.
And Union leadership wasting dues…But it’s what Liberals do best…Use other people’s money…
What is that “Conservative Accounting” ?
Their are two sides to a law suit and the lawyers need to get paid.
If this Teabully Governor was really “Conservative” with the Taxpayer Purse he would have refrained from stirring up a hornets nest!
If he was a True Statesman he would have articulately resolved the issue before it even went to court.
But NO he is a Neandrethal , Caveman with a Club and an Attitude!
If democrats would stop their whining and let this issue go, there would be no lawsuits over it. Democrats are childish spoiled brats unable to take no for an answer.
I can’t imagine a situation in which blind ignorance should go unchallenged. The level of incompetence that oozes from this guy requires the rest of us to provide some accountability and adult oversight.
So I take it you were against the Republicans taking Obamacare all the way to the Supreme Courtafter losing in the lower courts? Funny I don’t seem to remember you saying that in any of your post on that subject.
Actually the lower courts were split on the merits of Obamacare and it lost in the Supreme Court only because it was determined to be a “Tax” but otherwise not legal under the commerce clause. There are several other cases now working their way through the system that the Supreme Court invited challenges on.
I’m not sure how anyone would compare the labor mural to Obamacare but no, I was not against that at all.
As Usual Conservatives wasting taxpayer dollars defending their rights to free speech to hold down the working class even If it is only a “Picture” of them!
Great, Mainers have a squabble so they go crying and whining
to get help in Massachusetts.
Arent smart enough to figure it out for themselves.
There’s your sign.
Grow up , crybabies.
One would hope that the Court can decide this one on the merit’s but, unfortunately, Maine already has a record in Boston for putting moosepoop in front of the Court. This is exactly the type case that the Court could very well use to publicly demonstrate it’s ‘We’re fed up with Paulie’s stuff’ position and send the AG’s Office a not very subtle message of ‘Quit wasteing our time’ when Maine keeps putting nonsense case’s and appeal’s in front of the Court that are both useless and, if anyone at the AG’s Office can read, have already been decided if they would bother to just read the law that’s already on the book’s. The DHHS’ Medicaid case and the DC 9’s ACA arguement’s are both VERY recent, and publicly seen ‘fannysmack’, case’s that the Court’s sent back to Maine as a signal that the Court’s have far more serious case’s to decide. The Court’s have more than enough work to do than to be dragged into, and play referee, a labor dispute that LePage himself started. This mural case is, one way or the other, going to be seen as a sign to the Court that LePage’s temper tantrum’s aren’t over. The Court’s ruling, either way, is going to be seen as a signal as to just how much more of Paulie the Court’s are going to, or are willing to, put up with.
Good lord Mike, LePage took a picture down and now it is being fought in court. LePage didn’t take it to court, the democrat whiners took it to court. And you are right, the whole thing is stupid.
What a waste of taxpayer’s money!
This is history so lets take down every thing that has any thing to do with the history of working people in Maine
Looking at the contract, the permanent place of display is to be the Department of Labor building in Augusta, and the artist is to be informed if the mural is to be moved or removed. She was not.
This whole thing has nothing to do with “government speech” or an anonymous fax, or bias toward labor, or even LePage’s most recent claim, that the money to pay for it was “robbed” from the unemployment fund.
It has everything to do with the Governor stomping his feet, letting everyone know that he can do whatever he wants because he is the boss, and they can’t do anything about it.
Wonderful how about sending the whinny liberals that are trying to save this piece of trash to boston with it.
The first problem is calling this piece of trashy propaganda “Art”.
I don’t know if people want this mural back, or they just don’t like that Lepage took it down. The mural itself is very bland and depressing. I wouldn’t want to have to look at it day after day.I guess the definition of art is relative.
I believe its the latter…
LePage certainly has cost the state big bucks do far, he has another year or so to go. How much of a bill will he eventually run up with his antics.
He started this by removing the mural, apparently he figured no one would notice.
Actually he is just half way through his term. We have another 2 years. Love the Gov!!!
He can hit the road now.
Yes, lord forbid we forget that we used child labor to build this big beautiful state.
Yes, I can see where all those people dressed in work clothes would be highly offensive to someone who wears loafers and pretends to work. Most people would rue the day they ever touched that painting that no one was aware of until LePage came along. Not our governor though, he wears dim witted words and actions like a badge.
We need a new approach. We need to write new rules for getting rid of Governors that are unable to do their jobs. He should have been fired and needs to be fired. We also needed to get rid Bainer, he is not working in the best interest of the People or of the Country as is evident by the vote of the People. We want to change that President Obama has spoken about and we want them now! Mr Bainer!