New Mexico Attorney General Will Not Defend Governor’s Order Suspending Gun Rights

GOA Files New Case Against New York's CCIA, iStock-697763642
New Mexico Attorney General Will Not Defend Governor’s Order Suspending Gun Rights, iStock-697763642

New Mexico Attorney General Raúl Torrez sent a letter to Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham informing her that his office would not be defending the Governor’s order suspending open and concealed carrying of firearms in Albuquerque and the surrounding area. The AG said the order “does not pass constitutional muster” and does nothing for public safety.

“Though I recognize my statutory obligation as New Mexico’s chief legal officer to defend state officials when they are sued in their official capacity, my duty to uphold and defend the constitutional rights of every citizen takes precedence,” Torrez’s letter stated. “Simply put, I do not believe that the Emergency Order will have any meaningful impact on public safety but, more importantly, I do not believe it passes constitutional muster.”

At least six lawsuits were filed against the New Mexico Governor over her order, including cases from every major Second Amendment organization or their proxies. The first challenge hit Saturday before the ink was dry. Gun Owners of America (GOA) was the first organization to get a hearing for a temporary restraining order (TRO). That hearing was scheduled for 11 A.M. today before Federal District Judge David H. Urias vacated the hearing date. Although Judge Urias didn’t give a reason for the cancelation, many believe that the judge is planning on combining all the cases to be heard at once.

Almost all legal scholars believe that the Governor’s order is blatantly unconstitutional, leading many on the anti-gun side of the debate to abandon the Governor. The Albuquerque Police Chief, Harold Medina, stated that his department will not enforce the rule against citizens carrying firearms. The Sheriff of Bernalillo County, John Allen, said he cannot enforce the order and fulfill his oath to the United States and New Mexico Constitutions.

New Mexico also eliminated qualified immunity. Qualified immunity prevents public servants from being sued for actions taken in their official duties. Since these protections do not exist in New Mexico, the officials enforcing the rule can be held personally liable if the order is found to be unconstitutional. Since nearly all legal minds believe that the order violates the Bruen decision, which makes local law enforcement very apprehensive about enforcing the order.

It is not just law enforcement and the AG’s Office that have abandoned Governor Lujan Grisham’s plan.

Democratic New Mexico State Representatives and Senators have also been critical of the Governor’s move. Sen. Joe Cervantes called on the Governor to rescind the public health order. His statement reads:

“Having passed key gun safety laws working with her administration, I call on the Governor to rescind her order outlawing arms. An unconstitutional approach undermines the important collaboration gun issues deserve, and the important role of a Governor to lead genuine reforms.”

While Democrats in the New Mexico Legislature turn on the Governor, Republican Rep. Stefani Lord and John Block are moving to impeach Lujan Grisham for violating her oath to the Constitution. The movement is gaining steam.

“I was completely shocked. I mean, this is no way to address a crime issue,” Lord said. “She took an oath to uphold that Constitution. She needs to understand that those rights are absolute. And that’s why we are impeaching her, because she has committed a crime in what she is doing.”

The criticism extends past just New Mexico. Even anti-gun zealots like David Hogg and Ted Lieu think the Governor has gone too far. Both point out that the Governor cannot suspend Constitutionally protected rights. Even CNN, a long ally of the Governor, questioned her authority to overrule the Constitution.

The writing is on the wall with the latest action of the George Soros-funded AG Torrez. It is only a matter of time before the Governor’s health order is cast upon the heap of Government overreach and ruled unconstitutional.

The Governor’s office did not respond to AmmoLand’s request for comment.

Letter From AG Torrez by AmmoLand Shooting Sports News on Scribd


About John Crump

John is an NRA instructor and a constitutional activist. John has written about firearms, interviewed people from all walks of life, and on the Constitution. John lives in Northern Virginia with his wife and sons and can be followed on Twitter at @crumpyss, or at www.crumpy.com.

John Crump

32 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Arizona

That’s all well and good, but the criminal governor must be punished for her crime. She must be impeached and imprisoned for violating the civil rights of Americans. She must languish a few years behind bars.

CarlosDanger

Issuing an unconstitutional executive order is not a criminal offense, unless you could prove that she KNEW it was illegal, which is nearly impossible. She should definitely be impeached by her constituents, however, and hopefully removed from office.

ridgeview

She is a lawyer, she knew exactly what she was doing and more than likely ran it by the attorney general .

CarlosDanger

Yes, but there are tons of legally-accepted “exceptions” to constitutional rights, and it’s easy for her to argue that she sincerely believed that her “temporary” order was justified and legal. So bottom line: She’ll never be charged criminally for this, much less see the inside of a prison.

Wild Bill

I want to explain the so called “legally-accepted “exceptions” to you so that it will not be a mystery. Since 1804 American jurists have often had their own agendas. One of the worst was Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr, who could not stand the thought of an ordinary person and himself having the same standing before the law. Another was Hugo Black who hated the Catholic Church so badly that he was willing to lie, deceive, and contort Constitutional law to strike a blow to Catholicism. And there are legions of other federal and state jurists that have, over the years,… Read more »

TexDad

18 U.S. Code § 242

“Whoever, under color of any law, statute, ordinance, regulation, or custom, willfully subjects any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth, Possession, or District to the deprivation of any rights, privileges, or immunities secured or protected by the Constitution or laws of the United States…

“shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than one year”

She’s a criminal.

CarlosDanger

Except that attorneys can (and do) argue all day long about the definition of terms like “deprived” and the limits of what “protected by” means. It’s the whole “the 1st amendment doesn’t allow you to shout fire in a crowded theater and the 2nd amendment doesn’t mean that anyone can possess any weapon anywhere at any time” thing.There are tons of legally-accepted “exceptions” to constitutional rights, and it’s easy for her to argue that she sincerely believed that her “temporary” order was justified and legal. So bottom line: She’ll never be charged criminally for this, much less see the inside… Read more »

TexDad

She is a criminal. Clearly.

Whether or not justice is served to the elites or lawyers can successfully complicate things for the affected parties is another matter.

This was an overtly criminal act, and arguing that prosecution shouldn’t be attempted because it’s difficult is not helpful.

Stag

“It’s the whole “the 1st amendment doesn’t allow you to shout fire in a crowded theater and the 2nd amendment doesn’t mean that anyone can possess any weapon anywhere at any time” thing.There are tons of legally-accepted “exceptions” to constitutional rights…” You should read up on your “crowded theater” example and you’ll see how that was overturned. Also, the 2nd amendment means exactly that. There are no exceptions to it. Government is explicitly forbidden from enacting any law infringing on the right to keep and bear arms. There are no exceptions for how, when, or where one may keep and… Read more »

Coelacanth

The fire in a theater has been disproven in court, so drop that one. Anyone CAN shout “FIRE” in a theater, but there will probably be consequences. It’s a First Amendment thing, probably something you never learned in the little socialist’s training camps that they call “public schools”. You seem to be the result of not being properly educated. That is extremely common these days. This rogue governor has committed a crime and she should pay the price. Period!

FL-GA

It would be difficult to prove that her intent was to deny Constitutional rights. She stated “Public Safety” to protect her from successful prosecution.

TexDad

That’s true, but would that have to be the primary intent?

“Willfully” is an element, but does that mean she has to specifically intend to break this law?

Whether or not she willfully ordered what she ordered is not in question. You can examine her own public statements and settle that. The question, then, is whether or not it’s a deprivation under 18 U.S. Code § 242.

If it’s a willful act, and it’s deprivation of rights, then she’s guilty.

TexDad

To be clear here, I’m talking about a mistake of law as opposed to a mistake of fact. If she mistakenly believes this act was not deprivation of rights, that does not excuse her behavior.

The responsibility to know, as even her fellow gun banners know, that this is blatant unilateral banning of constitutionally protected behavior, is hers.

Coelacanth

She is a lawyer, so that thought is null. She thinks the Constitution is just words, like the constitution of the defunct Soviet Union. She committed a crime, all right. Consequences are in order.

USMC0351Grunt

For starters? LAW 101: Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law. Monkeys smoking crack KNOW her BS executive order was illegal from the moment her brain cells concocted it!

https://www.justice.gov/crt/deprivation-rights-under-color-law

As for ANY U.S. citizen losing ANY rights, THAT citizen has to WAVE those rights in a court of law. THAT is the only way of losing rights beyond being found guilty of any crime that individual is found guilty of my their own admittance or by judge or jury decision, thereby waiving certain rights and pleading guilty to a crime relinquishing those particular rights.

Last edited 1 year ago by USMC0351Grunt
MICHAEL J

Not all criminals are thugs, they’re politicians.

Rob

Sometimes the lines between both are blurred…..

The other Jim

July 1, 2021 Michelle Lujan signed the law eliminating Qualified Immunity. This is the perfect time for the Governor to start taking out a second mortgage to pay for the legal fees and ancillary costs of the lawsuits filed thus far, and any mitigating effects she caused that she now needs to pay for. https://www.jurist.org/news/2021/04/new-mexico-governor-signs-law-eliminating-qualified-immunity/

Shotsmith

I was wondering if she signed the law ending qualified immunity. She should reap the rewards of her actions.

King Loui of France was credited with redesigning and improving the guillotine. He also got to experience his improvements first hand.

The other Jim

Yes, she did. She likes to hurt people and forgot she signed it. It might come back to hurt her badly in an empty bank account/bankruptcy.

gregs

if she loses can she be removed from her position as governor?
can she be sued personally for this if the state has abolished qualified immunity?
have each plaintiff personally sue her for 10 million with a 1983 suit, pay up or resign.
she has to be taken out of office, as do all progs. they do nothing to benefit the citizen or country and are domestic enemies.

Stag

She has termed out. That’s another reason she felt balsy enough to do this.

ridgeview

At least that will happen.In new york state where i am from there is no term limit for governor hows that for corruption !

Shotsmith

You can’t fix stupid, but you can vote against it

Never vote for a democrat, and choose your Conservatives wisely.

USMC0351Grunt

The bottom line is if the people of the State of New Mexico sit on their apathetic asses instead of demanding vocally and in unison that she be charged, prosecuted and immediately removed from office, nothing will happen. After all, THAT is why each state has a Lieutenant Governor, to take over the state’s business during impeachment and prosecution of such acts.

Stag

If either he or the sheriff and police chief actually honored their oath, they would be charging and arresting her for her crimes. That’s what not only supporting but also defending the constitution looks like.

Bubba

I would love to be the one to slap the cuffs on her.
I think they have more than enough evidence to reasonably assume a crime has been committed.

My guess is Qualified Immunity still applies to the Governor and Politicians.
Only Cops get fטcked by these laws.

Coelacanth

What if 500 citizens did a citizen’s arrest on her ass? Would her security team stand down and stand by?

CaptainKerosene

Hoist on Her Own Petard

Matt in Oklahoma

Now get that outta being governor

Montana454Casull

” I can solve the puzzle Pat”
Belligerent Twat !

ez

And these are YOUR “leaders” (both parties)….
who feed you cow sheet all day long…..
while the masses…..
STAND FOR NOTHING, and FALL FOR EVERYTHING.