Earlier this year Maine Governor Janet Mills made national headlines when she quipped “see you in court” to Trump at the National Governors Association summit after he threatened the state over its laws that allow transgender athletes to play sports. In the bleak days of February, when it seemed like everyone was capitulating and few Democratic figures had yet to mobilize against the new administration, it was a bright moment for opponents of the president and trans people alike. For a relatively low profile governor from an otherwise sleepy state, it was also much of the country’s first introduction to Mills as a figure. Overnight she became a liberal icon. Sites selling shirts with her likeness and her now famous quote quickly cropped up.
Given her national reputation, one would assume that Mills’s entrance into next year’s Democratic primary race would galvanize Democrats across the political spectrum. From this outside perspective it would be easy to be confused as to why an alternative candidacy in Graham Platner so quickly ballooned when Mills was on offer. Many were quick to ascribe this to Mills’s advanced age or that Platner, as a burly white working class male type figure, had some intrinsic appeal. While both of these factors may have been in the mix, they don’t explain the full story.
Missing from much of the discussion online is much substance about who Janet Mills actually is as a political figure. Afterall, there is a reason why I, a trans woman who is appreciative of Mills’s stance on Trump, and someone who is on the record as hating the hyper-masculine populist trend as a solution to our post-2024 woes, am so opposed to Mills’s candidacy and jumped on the Platner campaign (although now after tattoo-gate, I have jumped off it). And I am obviously not the only one, given a recent poll showing her behind by 34 points. The fact is that in Maine, and to those familiar with the state’s politics, our governor has a far more complicated history than her more recent image depicts. Far less paid attention to, for example, was what Mills was at the time doing with her powers as governor, such as (unsuccessfully) trying to cut funding for childcare, refusing to sign a bill that would end the state’s cooperation with ICE, or more recently, opposing a ballot question on Maine’s gun laws—changes being pushed in the wake of a mass shooting that claimed the lives of 18 people.
Like what you’re reading? Support our work by joining our Patreon for free or as a subscriber!
It would be easy to think from her comments to Trump that Mills is a liberal champion, but within Maine she is well understood as a moderate, leaning to the right of the Democratic Party (a party whose legislative caucus she frequently is out of step with). One should not expect her to be straightforwardly a safe vote as a senator under a hypothetical future Democratic administration trying to push anything like court packing, or trials for ICE agents. While she may not be quite the level of a Lieberman, a Manchin or a Sinema, Mills will almost certainly be in the bloc of moderate Senators who endlessly frustrate liberals with their positions, and will be a roadblock to progress—after all she’s already announced as much with her declared support for the retention of the filibuster.
It’s not uncommon for residents of a state, particularly politically active ones, to have a quite different perspective on a local figure than those looking in from elsewhere across the country. Yet the gap between how many progressives in Maine view Janet Mills, and those only familiar with her from the Trump incident, is wide and divergent. With her new national prominence, it’s worth exploring her history in detail.
First, we should give Mills a bit of credit: it was genuinely quite bold of her to stand up to Trump in the meeting. It is also not something out of character for her to do. As Attorney General, she was frequently at loggerheads with Governor Paul LePage, a far right Republican elected with only 37% of the vote, who has often been compared to the president. It was this record that helped propel Mills to victory in a crowded 2018 gubernatorial primary. And four years later she would face LePage in her 2022 reelection campaign in which she trounced him, attaining the highest vote share by a gubernatorial candidate since 1998 (and the largest by a Democrat since 1982). With Trump occupying the White House, these are certainly desirable traits in a candidate.
At a time when trans people are under intense attack, and Democrats are under pressure to abandon trans people in the name of electability, that Mills chose to defend us is worth immense praise. Her actions put her in a tradition of Maine politicians standing up to authoritarianism, not unlike when Maragret Chase Smith (a family friend of the Mills family during her childhood) gave her Declaration of Conscience speech against McCarthyism in 1950. But it would also be a mistake to assume (as evidently many have) that the reason Mills did so is because she is a passionate defender of trans rights. Mills has a solid record on the issue—as much as any Democratic governor would—but as anti-trans bills were later introduced and debated in the Maine State Legislature, she would clarify her comments: “if [lawmakers] wish to change [the law], they have the authority to change it, but you don’t change it by executive order or by wishing it differently.” When asked about her personal stance on the issue, she declined to comment, saying the issue of trans children in sports was “worth of a debate, a full democratic debate.” Not exactly a full throated defense of trans people.
Instead these comments make clear Mill’s real passion: the law.
When Mills stood up to Trump, she wasn’t so much doing it out of strong conviction about trans issues, she was doing it because she was “complying with state and federal law.” Her disagreement with the president was around his use of executive orders to unilaterally change the law, something he straightforwardly does not have the power to do. This should not be surprising to anyone who knows Mills’s history. A graduate of Maine Law, Mills spent her whole career as a prosecutor, becoming the first female district attorney in New England in 1980, and culminating in her appointment as Maine’s Attorney General in 2009, which besides for a brief two year window, was an office she would continue to hold for the next decade. Like LePage before him, Mills is not going to simply let Trump get away with violating these laws, and the institutions she has spent decades defending and enforcing. To do so would go against the animating impulse that has defined her career.
But there is a far darker side to Mill’s commitment to our legal institutions, and one that causes her to frequently clash with those in the state who want more out of our government and who are critical of the injustices that it has wrought. The clearest example of this is the issue of Wabanaki Sovereignty.
Maine’s relationship with its indigenous nations can be described as rocky at best. Unlike all other federally recognized tribes, the four in Maine (the Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians, the Mi’kmaq Nation, the Penobscot Nation and the Passamaquoddy Tribe) have a unique set of rules that govern their relationship with the state. This is based on the 1980 Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act, a law passed by Congress to settle a dispute between the Wabanaki and the state government, and since then the state has used the settlement to deny these nations the sovereignty to which they are entitled. Because of this, the Wabanaki nations do not have the same rights and legal protections as sovereign nations that other federally recognized tribes hold, nor do they have the same access to federal benefits and programs, a fact that is hindering their economic development and causing the state to lose out on thousands of jobs.
In her role as governor, Mills has played a major role in enforcing this status quo, using her veto pen to oppose both sweeping legislation, and piecemeal reform. To be quite clear this is not a question of moderation on Mills part, nor is this a partisan issue, many Republicans as well as Democrats are quite supportive of changes to the law. LD958, the reform Mills vetoed earlier this year, was introduced by the Republican House Minority Leader, and passed by the majority Democratic legislature. Mills’s defense of the institution of Maine’s state government is something we may welcome when it comes under federal attack, but we can’t forget that it also limits what she is willing to support when it comes to changes, and that it leads her to support ugly, racist policies.
Since coming to office Mills has used her veto power against a wide variety of issues, covering everything from tenant protections, to the rights of farmworkers, to the rights of public sector workers (who she has been no friend to when it comes to wage negotiation). Glaringly, she vetoed a proposal to close down the infamously racist Long Creek facility, the state’s youth prison. This past session in addition to blocking the anti-ICE legislation mentioned previously, Mills also pushed back on expanding ranked choice voting to state offices (Maine only uses RCV for federal offices due to an obscure constitutional wording—again the law). One of the major wins of Mills’s time in office—paid family and medical leave—only happened with the threat of a ballot question hanging over it. Currently, as her senate campaign gets off the ground, she is doubling down on the state’s existing “yellow flag law,” a compromise that failed to prevent the 2023 mass shooting. Following that shooting, while even conservative Democratic Congressman Jared Golden was flipping on gun rights, Mills was vetoing a bump stock ban.
Her approach to the budgetary process has been similarly frustrating. While Republicans may try to frame her as such, Mills is certainly no tax and spend liberal and under her time in office, the state has taken an extremely fiscally cautious approach. During the boom years following the COVID-19 pandemic, as federal funds flowed to the states, rather than using the flush of cash the state had to improve things for residents, Mills instead opted to save, running up huge surpluses in the state’s budgets. In fact these surpluses were so significant (and continue to be so) that the state’s rainy day fund—an account where any excesses in state funds go—earlier this year reached its legal maximum. While the state’s accounts are filling up, under the guise of responsibility Mills has pushed for cuts to public services, and generally resisted funds for new programs. She has also been an opponent of new taxation, even vetoing a proposed bipartisan tax hike on the wealthy put forward by a Republican.
It should also be understood that while Mills has nothing but contempt for the LePages or the Trumps of the world, she doesn’t have the pure hatred of the GOP that the moment calls for. Coming from a Republican family, she endorsed her brother when he ran for governor in 2006. While this is somewhat understandable, more recently, and far more damningly, when asked about her soon to be opponent just a few months ago, Mills told reporters “I appreciate everything [Collins] is doing,” something the Collins camp is already taking advantage of in its ads.
It is obvious that our system is broken. Most Americans do not think it is working. Our institutions have failed to prevent Donald Trump from attempting to rule the country as a monarch. If Democrats return to power in 2028, a return to normalcy will not vanquish Trumpism anymore than it did in 2020, and we need elected officials willing to enact greater change if we hope to see it defeated. We need to be willing to overhaul our institutions if we want to protect our democracy. And that is not Janet Mills. She will speak out against authoritarianism—a brave and laudable thing to do—but will do little to go on the attack.
As a trans woman living in Maine, I am incredibly thankful that Mills did not buckle when Trump threatened the state. Because of her actions (Maine did beat Trump in court) my community continues to be protected to an extent from a federal government that hopes to attack our existence. But with our country in crisis, her particular brand of politics is not suited for the moment. Electing Janet Mills in the hopes of getting the anti-Trump crusader, is likely to get you Janet Mills, the moderate lawyer. Having those sorts of senators is what got us into this mess in the first place.