Legislative Power.
Me. Const. Art. IV, pt 3, § 1

"The Legislature, with the exceptions hereinafter stated, shall have full power to make and establish all reasonable laws and regulations for the defense and benefit of the people of this State, not repugnant to this Constitution, nor to that of the United States." 
 http://janus.state.me.us/legis/const/

Both property and liberty are held on such reasonable conditions as may be imposed by the governing power of the state. Adair v. United States, 208 U.S. 161, 173 (1908)

“Reasonable under the Fourth Amendment requires a careful balancing of ‘the nature and quality of the intrusion on the individual's Fourth Amendment interests' against the countervailing governmental interests at stake.” Graham v. Connor, 490 U.S. 386, 396 (1989).

It is the governmental power of self-protection and permits reasonable regulation of rights and property in particulars essential to the preservation of the community from injury. Panhandle Eastern Pipeline Co. v. Highway Comm'n, 294 U.S. 613, 622 (1935).

The possession and enjoyment of all rights are subject to such reasonable conditions as may be deemed by the governing authority of the country essential to the safety, health, peace, good order, and morals of the community. Crowley v. Christensen, 137 U.S. 86, 89 (1890)

The states possess…. the power-to prescribe such regulations as may be reasonable, necessary, and appropriate for the protection of the public health and comfort; California Reduction Co. v. Sanitary Works, 199 U.S. 306, 318-19 (1905). >See Hannibal & St. J. R. Co. v. Husen, 95 U.S. 465, 470 ;

“legislative enactment’s must be narrowly drawn to express only the legitimate state interest at stake.” Griswold v Connecticut, 381 U.S. at 485, 85 S.Ct., at 1682.

Such a law, even though enacted pursuant to a valid state interest, bears a heavy burden of justification, …..and will be upheld only if it is necessary, and not merely rationally related, to the accomplishment of a permissible state policy. McLaughlin v. Florida, 379 U.S. 184, 196, (1964).

" In the absence of compelling justification, the police power does not extend so far as to permit the Government to protect an individual against himself and that the concern for public health and safety is relevant only insofar as the action of one individual may threaten the well-being of others." United States V Kiffer 477 F2.d 349 (1973), at 354.

Determining whether the force used to effect a particular seizure is "reasonable" under the Fourth Amendment requires a careful balancing of "`the nature and quality of the intrusion on the individual's Fourth Amendment interests'" against the countervailing governmental interests at stake. Id., at 8, quoting United States v. Place, 462 U.S. 696, 703 (1983)                          490 U.S. 386, 396

The Court “must evaluate the search or seizure under traditional standards of reasonableness by assessing, on the one hand, the degree to which it intrudes upon an individual's privacy and, on the other, the degree to which it is needed for the promotion of legitimate governmental interests. Wyoming v. Houghton, 526 U.S. 295, 300 (1999).

 If, therefore, a statute purporting to have been enacted to protect the public health, ……or the public safety, has no real or substantial relation to those objects, or is a palpable invasion of rights secured by the fundamental law, it is the duty of the courts to so adjudge, and thereby give effect to the constitution. 123 U.S. 623, 661