Net Neutrality Bill in Maine Becomes Law Without Governor’s Signature
Governor Mills has yet to issue a statement about the decision
WASHINGTON, July 9, 2025 – A bill to establish net neutrality standards in Maine became public law on June 22 without the signature of Gov. Janet Mills, D.
The bill passed the Maine State House on June 4, and the state Senate followed suit on Thursday, June 5, adopting the House's amended version of the bill. A few days later, the bill was sent to the governor’s desk for promulgation.
In Maine, if the governor does not sign a bill within 10 days of receiving it, and the state legislature is still in session, the bill becomes law, which happened to be the case here.
FROM SPEEDING BEAD SUMMIT
Panel 1: How Are States Thinking About Reasonable Costs Now?
Panel 2: Finding the State Versus Federal Balance in BEAD
Panel 3: Reacting to the New BEAD NOFO Guidance
Panel 4: Building, Maintaining and Adopting Digital Workforce Skills
As of now, there is no publicly available official statement from Mills explaining why she did not sign the bill. In 2019, she signed into law L.D. 1364, a net neutrality bill that applied to ISPs with state contracts. The 2025 net neutrality bill simply expands those requirements to cover all users operating in the state.
Originally introduced by Rep. Christopher Kessler, D-Portland, the main provision of the act states that “an Internet service provider shall provide net neutral service in the provision of broadband Internet to customers in the State.”
In other words, ISPs doing business in Maine must treat all platforms and websites equally – prohibiting blocking, throttling, or paid prioritization. Disobedience of this section constitutes a violation of the Maine Unfair Trade Practices Act.
During a legislative hearing in April, Maine Connectivity Authority President Andrew Butcher expressed opposition to the bill, warning that it “raises legal, technical, and policy concerns that merit careful consideration and further study.”
He cited the legal uncertainty following a federal court’s 2025 decision in Ohio Telecom Association v. FCC, which struck down federal net neutrality rules, and he argued that imposing a state-specific standard could create enforcement challenges in a globally interconnected Internet ecosystem.
“Given the highly interconnected nature of ISP infrastructure—both nationally and globally—it is difficult to assess how a state-specific standard could be enforced effectively without unintended consequences,” Butcher wrote in testimony.
Butcher also warned that the bill could expose ISPs to enforcement risk without clear technical guidance, placing interpretive responsibility on the courts. Instead, he urged lawmakers to consider a more measured approach focused on transparency, data collection, and further study.
Member discussion