An Act to Prohibit Eminent Domain on Existing Tribal Trust Lands
Summary
LD958 amends Maine’s Indian land-claims and tribal settlement laws to prohibit the taking of certain tribal trust lands for public uses under state eminent domain law. Specifically, it provides that land within the Passamaquoddy Indian territory, Penobscot Indian territory, Houlton Band Trust Land, and Mi'kmaq Nation Trust Land may not be taken for public uses under the laws of the State. The bill also updates related provisions governing how lands are added to tribal territories and how compensation is handled when land within tribal territory is taken under federal law or otherwise affected.
The bill preserves and restates existing procedures for tribal land acquisition and certification, including requirements involving the Secretary of State, the Secretary of the Interior, and, in some cases, approval by local governments or the Legislature. It also maintains the framework under which certain lands acquired for the benefit of the Passamaquoddy Tribe or Penobscot Nation can be included in tribal territory, while tightening the rule that state eminent domain cannot be used against the specified trust lands. The measure is framed as an amendment to the Maine Indian Claims Settlement Act and the Mi'kmaq Nation Restoration Act.
Impact
If enacted, LD958 would change Maine law by removing state eminent-domain authority over the identified tribal trust lands and territories, limiting public entities and utilities from condemning those lands for state-law public uses. It would affect the Passamaquoddy Tribe, Penobscot Nation, Houlton Band of Maliseet Indians, and Mi'kmaq Nation, as well as state and local governments, public utilities, and any entity seeking to acquire land for public projects. The bill also interacts with existing statutes governing tribal territory boundaries, land additions, and compensation/reinvestment rules, but does not broadly alter federal eminent-domain law or the underlying settlement acts beyond the specific prohibition and conforming changes described in the text.
Sentiment
The voting history suggests the bill had meaningful support but also substantial opposition. It passed the House on final enactment by a 77-63 vote after earlier favorable votes on the majority ought-to-pass-as-amended report and enactment, indicating a divided but ultimately successful coalition. The later reconsideration vote on the veto also passed, showing continued support for the measure despite executive resistance. Overall, the sentiment appears generally favorable among supporters of tribal land protections, while opponents likely viewed it as an expansion of tribal immunity from state infrastructure and public-use projects.
Contention
The main point of contention is whether the State should retain eminent-domain authority over tribal trust lands and territories for public projects. Supporters appear to favor a categorical prohibition to protect tribal lands from state takings, while opponents likely object to limiting flexibility for roads, utilities, and other public uses. A secondary issue is the bill’s interaction with existing settlement frameworks and local approval requirements, especially where land additions to tribal territory have historically involved municipal or legislative consent. The bill’s inclusion of multiple tribal entities and trust-land categories suggests broader policy implications beyond a single tribe or parcel, which may have contributed to the divided votes.