Piñon Post

First Dem legislator breaks silence on MLG’s anti-gun order

23 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

On Monday, Bernalillo Sheriff John Allen blasted Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s unconstitutional order to disarm all law-abiding citizens in Bernalillo County from having either concealed or open firearms.

He said, “I’m not going to enforce it.” 

“The governor made it clear in her press conference,” he said, adding, “She knew we as law enforcement did not agree with the order, and as a result this was solely her decision.”

“We don’t agree with this at all. This is unconstitutional and like I said, I uphold my oath seriously,” Allen said.

The first Democrat legislator finally broke their silence, with state Sen. Joseph Cervantes (D-Doña Ana County) writing on Twitter, “Having passed key gun safety laws working with her administration, I call on the Governor to rescind her order outlawing arms.”

He further wrote, “An unconstitutional approach undermines the important collaboration gun issues deserve, and the important role of a Governor to lead genuine reforms.”

There has not been a single Democrat legislator publicly coming out in support of the governor’s unconstitutional order as of publication.

Vasquez, Dems silent on MLG’s gun ban as defensive gov attacks leftist critics

30 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

As the U.S. Constitution comes under attack in his district by anti-gun Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham, far-left U.S. Rep. Gabe Vasquez, who is extremely vulnerable in 2024, refused to stand up for constitutional rights by condemning the governor’s attacks.

On Friday, New Mexico Governor Lujan Grisham issued an emergency order suspending the right to carry firearms in public across Albuquerque and all of Bernalillo County county for at least 30 days. She also erroneously claimed she had the power to do it by executive order, claiming citizens’ rights are not “absolute.”

While other Democrats like far-left U.S. Rep. Ted Lieu (D-CA) and anti-gun activist David Hogg publicly condemned Governor Grisham for suspending the U.S. Constitution, Vasquez and all New Mexico congressional representatives are silent. Not a single Democrat state representative or senator has come out in support of the governor’s unconstitutional order.

Lujan Grisham even went on the defense on X, formerly Twitter, to attack Lieu for his stance against her gun grab. 

“Hey Ted, conceal and open carry are state laws that I have jurisdiction over. If you’re really interested in helping curb gun violence, I’d welcome you to join our next police academy class,” the governor wrote to her former colleague in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Vasquez and other Democrats’ silence on Governor Grisham’s decision is deafening, with the National Republican Congressional Committee (NRCC) saying it is again “showing that Vasquez is willing to align himself with the extreme edges on his party.”

The NRCC’s spokeswoman, Delanie Bomar, said in a statement, “Since coming to D.C. Gabe Vasquez has aligned himself with the extreme Left on a number of issues, the latest of which is this gun ban.”

She added, “Vasquez cannot ignore a violation of the Constitution and expect New Mexicans to accept his silence.”

New Mexico has made international news for the unconstitutional gun grab, with news outlets in Europe, Asia, and other continents picking up the story of the power grab.

Elon Musk agrees Lujan Grisham should be ‘removed from office’

Elon Musk agrees Lujan Grisham should be ‘removed from office’

54 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

Following Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham’s controversial press conference where she announced the suspension of Bernalillo County residents’ rights to open or concealed-carry firearms, the responses on social media, particularly X (formerly Twitter), have ignited a massive national conversation. Among those who voiced their concerns was Elon Musk, the renowned entrepreneur behind SpaceX and Tesla.

In response to a video of Governor Lujan Grisham’s announcement, Elon Musk took to X to express his sentiments. He stated, “At [the] risk of stating what should be obvious, deliberately violating the Constitution is next-level illegal,” underscoring his belief in the unconstitutionality of the governor’s actions. 

Musk continued by posing a question that resonated with many, “How soon can this person be removed from office?”

Musk’s comment echoed the concerns of numerous individuals who viewed Governor Lujan Grisham’s order as an infringement on Second Amendment rights, sparking a broader conversation about the legality and constitutionality of such measures.

During her press conference, Governor Lujan Grisham acknowledged that her order might face constitutional challenges. She emphasized that no right is absolute, including her own oath to uphold the Constitution. The move was met with fierce opposition from those who believe it infringes on citizens’ rights.

The controversy surrounding this issue has raised questions about executive authority’s limits and constitutional rights’ protection. While Governor Lujan Grisham asserts that her actions are necessary to address the issue of gun violence, critics argue that suspending residents’ Second Amendment rights goes against the principles of the Constitution.

Elon Musk’s involvement in this debate adds a high-profile voice to the chorus of those who believe that the governor’s actions are unconstitutional. As the founder of multiple influential companies, Musk’s statements carry significant weight in public discourse. His call to remove Governor Lujan Grisham from office underscores the seriousness of the constitutional concerns raised by the order.

It is important to note that this issue has sparked intense debate in New Mexico and across the United States. The balance between public safety and individual rights has long been a contentious topic in the country, and this recent controversy further highlights the deep divisions surrounding the Second Amendment and gun control measures.

As the debate continues to unfold, it remains to be seen how various legal challenges, public opinion, and political actions will shape the outcome of Governor Lujan Grisham’s order and its impact on the rights of Bernalillo County residents. 

State Reps. John Block (R-Alamogordo) and Stefani Lord (R-Sandia Park) have announced that they are already lining up impeachment articles with legal counsel.

Even Dem BernCo sheriff won’t enforce MLG’s unconstitutional gun order

31 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

On Friday, following a press conference where far-left anti-gun Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham ordered all concealed and open-carried firearms banned in Bernalillo County, Sheriff John Allen distanced himself from the extreme order.

Although he did not go right out and say he would not enforce her order, he wrote in a statement that “as the elected Sheriff, I have reservations regarding this order. While I understand and appreciate the urgency, the temporary ban challenges the foundation of our Constitution, which I swore an oath to uphold.”

He continued, “I am wary of placing my deputies in positions that could lead to civil liability conflicts, as well as the potential risks posed by prohibiting law-abiding citizens from their constitutional right to self-defense.”

“I was elected to represent and safeguard all constituents and to ensure the balance between our rights and public safety is maintained. That means we must critically evaluate any proposed solution to the deeply rooted issue of gun violence, ensuring we both protect our community and uphold the values that define us as a nation.” 

He listed some ways he wanted to address so-called “gun violence,” including enforcing anti-gun laws actually passed by the legislature, such as an extreme Red Flag law. He also said he will continue to find “sustainable solutions” to address the issue. 

At the press conference, Lujan Grisham said no rights are “absolute” and that her oath to the Constitution is not absolute. Allen joined the governor and others at the roundtable press conference held at the Capitol. 

Lujan Grisham signs illegal order ‘suspending’ ABQ residents’ gun rights

66 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

On Friday, far-left anti-gun Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham unilaterally — and unconstitutionally — violated New Mexico state laws and the U.S. and state constitutions by ordering all concealed-carrying of firearms be banned in Albuquerque. 

She said, “In this public health order, which is effective today, September 8th, which lasts thirty days, and then like all the other public health orders, we will either amend or renew or adjust depending upon where we are. So, effective immediately, no person other than a law enforcement officer or licensed security officer shall possess a firearm either openly or concealed within cities or counties averaging 1,000 or more violent crimes per  100,000 and  more than 90 firearm-related emergency department visits.”

She noted how the criteria in the order would affect “Albuquerque and Bernalillo Counties” for 30 days.

“We’re suspending open and concealed carry,” she added. 

Lujan Grisham even admitted how illegal the order is, saying, “I am sure before you [the media] write this, there will be a legal challenge, and I can’t tell you that we win it, given all of the different challenges to gun violence laws and restrictions on individual firearm access and control.”

The extremist move violates the New Mexico and federal constitutions, as well as state laws such as the Concealed Handgun Carry Act of 2003. Because the order is illegal and an abomination of the Constitution, it is therefore null and void. 

However, the governor still contends that any right in the Constitution is not “absolute,” saying even her oath to the Constitution is not absolute:

Watch the full press conference below:

Democrat lawmaker takes Gov. Lujan Grisham to court 

4 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

A Democrat representative in New Mexico, State Representative Miguel P. García (D-Albuquerque), has taken legal action against Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham over her veto of significant portions of an omnibus tax bill during the 2023 legislative session. García filed a petition in the New Mexico Supreme Court on September 6, 2023, seeking to declare the governor’s actions unconstitutional. To assist in this legal challenge, García enlisted the support of a lawyer and former New Mexico Senator Jacob Candelaria (I-Albuquerque).

The focus of the legal action is House Bill 547, which García contends is primarily a tax bill, not a bill appropriating money. He argues that Governor Lujan Grisham exceeded her limited line-item veto authority by striking down most of the bill, including provisions related to tax proposals to exempt more Social Security retirement income from State Income Tax.

House Bill 547 was a substantial piece of legislation during the recent legislative session, spanning over 100 pages. It sought to bring about various changes, including adjustments to the state’s income tax brackets, establishing a single corporate income tax rate, and introducing tax credits for a wide range of workers. This bipartisan effort was hailed as one of the most comprehensive tax reforms in recent years.

However, when the bill reached the governor’s desk, Lujan Grisham exercised her veto power to eliminate significant portions, including the proposed changes to the state’s income tax brackets. In her message to the legislature explaining her decision, she expressed concerns about the overall sustainability of the tax package, citing potential impacts on essential services and programs such as education, healthcare, public safety, and infrastructure.

Despite her veto, the governor did acknowledge her support for specific aspects of the bill. She emphasized her approval of portions that provided one-time tax rebates, increased the child income tax credit, enhanced the benefits of the film tax credit, and expanded the health practitioners’ gross receipts tax deduction. According to her statement, these measures aligned with her commitment to supporting working families, the healthcare system, and the state’s economy.

KRQE News 13 reached out to the governor’s office for a response to the legal challenge seeking to overturn the vetoes. In response, Caroline Sweeney, the governor’s press secretary, issued a statement acknowledging the right of New Mexicans to use the judicial system for seeking change and stated that they anticipate the suit will be dismissed after a judge’s review.

The legal dispute centers on interpreting the New Mexico Constitution, which grants the governor the authority to veto entire bills and approve or disapprove parts of any bill appropriating money. The petition argues that this language prevents the governor from vetoing portions of a tax bill like House Bill 547, which does not appropriate money. Candelaria contends that while the bill does mention money, such as tax rebate checks approved by lawmakers, a separate law appropriates those funds.

It remains to be seen when the New Mexico Supreme Court will address this issue, as there is no specific time obligation outlined in the state’s court procedures under Rule Set 12.

NM responds to ​​Gov. Lujan Grisham declaring a ‘gun violence’ emergency

46 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

Far-left Democrat Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham declared a “gun violence” “public health emergency” on Thursday, as well as shelling out $750,000 taxpayer dollars on new gun grabs, which she did by the stroke of a pen in an executive order.

The governor used an 11-year-old boy’s tragic murder on the way home from a baseball game as the pretext for her order. 

Here’s how New Mexicans responded to Lujan Grisham’s latest attempt at clinging to more power:

New Mexico House Republican Leader Ryan Lane (R-Aztec) wrote, “It is unfortunate that the Governor has decided to politicize the death of an 11-year-old to push her anti-gun agenda. What’s likewise unfortunate is that with billions in revenue this state has not funded meaningful criminal justice reform including addressing reckless pre-trial release policies and behavioral health rehabilitation. The Democrat’s policies have created and exacerbated the crime crisis that is literally killing New Mexicans daily. It is unacceptable that it has taken this long to notice the number of everyday New Mexicans that are being affected by criminal violence.”

State Rep. Stefani Lord (R-Sandia Park) wrote on X, “If only @GovMLG cared about the high number of babies and children that have died from Fentanyl overdose in New Mexico.”

“Or cared about the 599 overdose deaths each year, putting New Mexico 45.89% higher than the national average OD death rate. Or if she had pushed for the increased penalty bills for criminals with guns that I cosigned with Rep Bill Rehm. Or pushed for the ‘tough on crime’ bills that we presented.”

She added, “If only she cared enough to look at other states and how they have successfully lowered crime with task forces in high-crime areas that target criminals with guns.”

One person wrote, “What are you going to do to stop violent criminals? Guns are inanimate and in no way, shape, or form commit violent crime. People commit crime and it’s cowardice to blame inanimate objects. Not fooled.”

“This is on YOU.  You have created the crisis. The Constitution CANNOT be suspended because of a State public emergency that you have no authority to initiate & make up based on the policies YOU put into place,” another wrote, adding, “THE CHILD’S BLOOD IS ON YOU & THOSE THAT SUPPORT YOUR INSANITY. OWN IT. Because I guarantee I will let everyone know about throughout NM. You will not be able to escape the truth of what you are responsible for. I will not be silent.” 

“Disregard and flatly ignore NM Executive Order 2023-130,” wrote state Rep. John Block (R-Alamogordo).

The New Mexico Shooting Sports Association wrote, “For years, our Governor has constantly attacked law enforcement and peaceful gun owners while violent crime spiraled out of control. With every legislative measure passed, the problem has only become worse. This only stops when violent criminals are held accountable.”

Here are some other notable replies to Lujan Grisham’s latest order: 

Lujan Grisham declares ‘gun violence’ emergency, uses $750K for gun grabs

Police raid Hobbs facility linked to disgraced abortionist

7 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

In Hobbs, a controversy has erupted surrounding an office space allegedly rented by abortionist Steven Brigham. The office was linked to the Freedom Care abortion facility on the 4th floor of the Turner Street Don Garey Tower office building. This facility was reportedly evicted in July due to unpaid rent, resulting in Brigham’s breach of contract lawsuit against the landlord.

The situation is complicated, with allegations of deceptive practices. According to the landlord’s counterclaim, Brigham misrepresented the purpose of the rented space, initially claiming it was for specialty medical doctors, including cardiologists, without disclosing his true intention of operating an abortion mill. Moreover, Brigham was accused of concealing substantial unpaid liens and judgments.

Steven Brigham has a history of association with multiple abortion facilities across the United States, including the American Women’s Services chain in Maryland, New Jersey, and Virginia, the Capital Women’s Services in D.C., and the recently closed American Family Planning. His practices have faced scrutiny for various violations, including health and safety issues, abortion-related injuries, and lawsuits. Brigham has also encountered legal troubles, including murder charges related to discovering late-term aborted fetuses in a freezer at one of his facilities.

It is worth noting that Brigham has had his medical license revoked, suspended, or relinquished in multiple states, and he is not licensed to practice medicine in New Mexico.

The registration of the Hobbs facility, referred to as NM Medical Offices, LLC, doing business as Freedom Care, raised questions about its true purpose. According to court documents, the facility’s stated business purpose did not match its activities. The facility planned to offer first-trimester surgical abortions and dispense the abortion pill for pregnancies up to 12 weeks — two weeks longer than the FDA’s approved limit.

Additionally, the facility claimed that clients would meet with female healthcare providers. The controversy surrounding this facility intensified when it was revealed that Steven Brigham had signed the lease initially negotiated in October 2022.

Local pro-life advocates believe that Brigham chose Hobbs due to its proximity to an airport and states with stronger protections for children in the womb, namely Texas. Hobbs residents were working to pass a Sanctuary Cities for the Unborn ordinance when Brigham’s facility entered the community. Based on the federal Comstock Act, the ordinance aimed to prevent the shipping and receiving of abortion-inducing drugs and abortion paraphernalia. Although similar ordinances were passed in other cities and counties in New Mexico, legal challenges have emerged, raising questions about local autonomy and federal law compliance.

Concerns regarding the Hobbs facility arose when pro-life activists discovered its existence. The landlord, who resides in Texas, claimed to have been unaware of Brigham’s involvement and the abortion plans. The landlord took swift action to terminate the lease due to unpaid rent, locking the abortionist out of the property. This move also alleviated concerns about potential criminal liability under Texas’ Heartbeat Law, which allows civil enforcement against individuals aiding and abetting abortions.

Law enforcement is now investigating the situation, with a sealed search warrant executed at the Hobbs facility, according to Live Action. The controversy highlights the complex legal and ethical issues surrounding abortion facilities, deceptive practices, and local ordinances in the United States.

Teacher fumes after NM school bans ‘Pride’ flags, other ‘political messages’

75 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

A New Mexico high school teacher is triggered about the Rio Rancho Public School District (RRPSD) decision to ban the display of the Pride flag on classroom safe space signs as part of a policy aimed at eliminating “political messages” from educational spaces and apparently cracking down on grooming children.

The policy came to light when the principal of Cleveland High School sent an email to all teachers instructing them to remove the Pride flag from safe space signs and display only the school logo. This directive aligns with the district’s new guidelines.

Safe space signs, often featuring the Pride flag, are supposedly intended to create “inclusive” and “supportive” environments for “LGBTQ+” students. The anonymous teacher from Cleveland High School expressed confusion and disappointment about the change, telling KOB 4, “I’m not sure where this is coming from. Why did signs have to change or what, like, why they have to be these new signs which completely are inadequate in signaling anything that’s meaningful for students.”

The teacher emphasized the supposed importance of these safe spaces, claiming, “LGBTQ students, the statistics are really clear, they experience more bullying, and as a result, are more likely to experience mental health issues or suicidal ideation. And so safe spaces are places where students feel they can just be themselves.”

In response to the policy change, RRPSD is reportedly instructing teachers to remove pronouns from their email signatures, allowing only their title and name.

Alexander Grey via Unsplash.

When questioned about the policy shift, RRPSD provided a statement emphasizing its commitment to providing a safe and inclusive environment for all students. The statement indicated that the district’s goal is to maintain unity and inclusivity without singling out specific groups.

“We believe that all buildings, classrooms, and playgrounds should be safe zones,” the statement reads. “We are all unified in this effort and chose not to represent one group of students individually from another but rather each school is unified in their support of ALL students regardless of race, religion, color, national origin, ancestry, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, spousal affiliation, physical or cognitive disability or any other distinguishing characteristic; or on an association with a person, or group with any person, with one or more of the actual or perceived distinguishing characteristics.”

The RRPSD oversees 20 schools and serves approximately 16,000 students. The district’s decision has sparked debate about the balance between promoting inclusivity and preventing perceived political messaging within educational institutions.

NM ranked one of the worst states for money and well-being

23 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

New Mexico has found itself among the states ranked as some of the least favorable places to live regarding money and financial well-being — joining other low rankings for the Land of Enchantment. According to a comprehensive analysis by GOBankingRates, factors such as crime rates, property and income taxes, unemployment, and overall cost of living were considered to determine the states where your money may not stretch as far as elsewhere in the country.

The study incorporated data from various trusted sources, ranging from NeighborhoodScout for crime statistics to ATTOM Data for property tax rates. Additionally, data from the U.S. Census American Community Survey, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and other reputable sources were included in the assessment.

Hawaii took the unenviable top spot as the worst state for financial well-being. Hawaii’s overall cost of living is a staggering 79 percent higher than the national average, with healthcare and grocery prices soaring 18 percent and 25.6 percent above the norm, respectively. Despite these challenges, Hawaii does boast the lowest average state property tax rate in the country and a relatively lower violent crime rate.

Often seen as a land of rugged beauty, Alaska holds the second position on this list. It has the second-highest violent crime rate in the nation, and its overall cost of living is 24.4 percent higher than the national average, with groceries and healthcare costs soaring 27.4 percent and 49.8 percent above average, respectively. However, Alaska does not impose an income tax, offering some financial relief.

Washington, D.C., while not a state but an influential territory, finds itself in the mix due to concerning statistics across various parameters. D.C. has the highest violent and property crime rates among all 50 states. It also imposes the third-highest average state income tax rate and reports the second-highest unemployment rate at 5.74 percent. Additionally, the cost of living in the nation’s capital is 48.7 percent above the national average.

California, another state with a high cost of living, houses the largest number of unemployed individuals at 1.6 million. It ranks in the top five for unemployment rates in the nation, with an overall cost of living 34.5 percent higher than the national average. The state also grapples with a relatively high debt-to-income ratio.

Unfortunately, New Mexico stands out for having one of the country’s highest violent crime rates and property crime rates. Additionally, it reports the third-highest poverty rate among all U.S. states. While its overall cost of living isn’t significantly above the national average, healthcare costs in New Mexico are nearly on par, at 99.6 percent.

The study also highlighted other states, including Maryland, Louisiana, New York, and South Carolina, for various economic challenges, such as high property tax rates, elevated income tax rates, high crime rates, and significant poverty levels.

While these rankings provide a snapshot of the financial landscape in each state, it’s essential to consider individual circumstances and preferences when evaluating the best places to live based on financial factors.

1 … 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 … 63

Stay Updated

Scroll to Top