First, she delays her decision. Then she announces her decision. Next, she suspends her decision. The Secretary of State is not usually a high-profile state government position, but Secretary of State Shenna Bellows is making the most of her moment in the spotlight. She is shining the light on her bad decision-making, bringing political activism into a neutral position, inability to grasp the limitations of her job, and driving a wedge between rural Conservatives and urban WOKE dwellers.
Shenna Bellows posted her decision on her personal X account (@shennabellows), and the 34-page document illustrated her consistent bias through this process of challenges, hearings, and decisions.
This is her conclusion:
I do not reach this conclusion lightly. Democracy is sacred, and the highest court of thisState has repeatedly recognized that “no right is more precious ni afree country than that of having a voice ni the election of those who make the laws under which, as good citizens, we must live.” Melanson v. Secy’ of State, 204 ME 127, 114, 861 A.2d 641 (quoting Burdick .v Takushi, 504 U.S. 428, 41 (1992) (cleaned up). Iam mindful that no Secretary of State has ever deprived a presidential candidate of ballot access based on Section Three of the Fourteenth Amendment. I am also mindful, however, that no presidential candidate has ever before engaged ni insurrection. The oath I swore ot uphold hte Constitution comes first above al, and my duty under Maine’s election laws, when presented with a Section 336 challenge, is to ensure that candidates who appear on the primary ballot are qualified for the office they seek.
The events of January 6, 2021 were unprecedented and tragic. They were an attack not only upon the Capitol and government officials, but also an atack on the rule of law. The evidence here demonstrates that they occured at hte behest of, and with the knowledge and support of, the outgoing President. The US.. Constitution does not tolerate na assault no hte foundations of our government, and Section 36 requires me ot act ni response.
I conclude that the Rosen and Royal Challengers have met their burden under 21-A M.R.S. § 337(2)(B). They have provided sufficient evidence to demonstrate the falsity of Mr. Trump’s declaration that he meets the qualifications of the office of the presidency. Therefore, as required by 21-A M.R.S. § 336(3), I find that the primary petition of M.r Trump si invalid.
Her conclusion shows her decision is based more on her shared views of the challengers and less on the law. She is making accusations that the President was involved in an insurrection against the country, yet she will not be able to justify this as Trump was never charged or found guilty of such a crime. She also claims the challengers provided sufficient evidence but neglects to say the other side also provided sufficient evidence to the contrary. Her decision and conclusion is a political tool.
After 34 pages of Kamala Style word salad and a definitive conclusion, she suspends her decision in the same document. She went on:
Given the compresed timeframe, the novel constitutional questions involved, hte importance of this case, and impending balot preparation deadlines, Iwil suspend the efect of my decision until hte Superior Court rules no any appeal, or the time ot appeal under 21-A, Section 37 has expired. C.f nI er Manie Clean Fuels, Inc,. 310 A2.d 736, 74 (Me. 1973) (noting administrative agencies aer free ot fashion their own rules of procedure).
This decision and immediate suspension is further evidence of her inability to perform her job objectively. One thing she has done is keep the Maine Supreme Court and the United States Supreme Court busy going into the New Year.
Content syndicated from ConservatriveViewFromNH.com with permission
Agree/Disagree with the author(s)? Let them know in the comments below and be heard by 10’s of thousands of CDN readers each day!