New Mexico

Semi-auto ban, red flag expansion, and more: See the status of these gun grabs

20 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

As the 2025 New Mexico Legislative Session reaches its halfway point, several pieces of anti-gun legislation are making their way through the state legislature, with some bills gaining traction while others remain stalled.

The most significant recent development was the passage of the “weapon conversion device” ban as part of the omnibus crime bill, HB8. This bill, which was altered and pushed through the House Judiciary Committee, was quickly advanced to the House floor, where it passed on a 48-20 vote. Notably, several Republicans joined Democrats in voting for the measure.

According to the New Mexico Shooting Sports Association (NMSSA), HB8 now contains the following provision:

“Unlawful possession of a weapon conversion device consists of a person knowingly having in that person’s possession an unlawfully obtained weapon conversion device or knowingly transporting an unlawfully obtained weapon conversion device… ‘weapon conversion device’ means a part or combination of parts designed and intended to convert a semiautomatic weapon into a fully automatic weapon.”

With the House’s approval, HB8 now heads to the Senate, although committee assignments for the bill have not yet been announced.

Meanwhile, HB12, which seeks to expand New Mexico’s red-flag gun confiscation law, was notably left out of HB8. According to NMSSA, efforts were made by the bill’s sponsors to include it in the omnibus legislation, but they were unsuccessful. HB12 has now been awaiting action on the House floor for over a week. NMSSA warns that it could be brought up for a vote at any time and is urging continued opposition to the measure.

Several anti-gun bills introduced in the Senate remain in committee and have yet to see movement. These include:

  • SB255, which would expand the criminalization of private firearms transfers, is currently sitting in the Senate Health and Public Affairs Committee.
  • SB279, a proposed ban on semiautomatic rifles and magazines, as well as SB244, which would make it a crime for a minor to possess a firearm, both waiting for hearings in the Senate Judiciary Committee.
  • SB318, which could allow anti-gun activists to sue gun stores in New Mexico out of existence,was assigned to the Senate Tax, Business & Transportation Committee.

As for pro-gun legislation, HB202, which would establish a tax credit for the purchase of gun safes, is scheduled for a hearing in the House Taxation and Revenue Committee on Monday, February 17. The bill aims to encourage safe firearm storage by offering financial incentives to gun owners who invest in secure storage solutions.

With the pace of the legislative session picking up, NMSSA warns that more bills could advance quickly through committees in the coming days. The organization continues to urge Second Amendment supporters to stay vigilant, share information, and engage in the legislative process to oppose the proposed restrictions.

As the debate over gun legislation intensifies in Santa Fe, the fate of these bills will likely come down to key votes in the coming weeks, making citizen engagement and legislative scrutiny more critical than ever.

Semi-auto ban, red flag expansion, and more: See the status of these gun grabs Read More »

Week 4: Legislative update from Piñon Post editor and state Rep. John Block

5 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

A legislative update from Piñon Post founder and editor and state Rep. John Block (R-Alamogordo). John gives a weekly update during the legislative session. If you don’t already get the update, you can get it here or by subscribing on the website JohnForNM.com.

What a week it has been at the Roundhouse! Here’s what happened in my committees, as well as other events of note.

On Monday, in the House Government, Elections, and Indian Affairs Committee (HGEIC), I moved to table a bad piece of legislation (H.C.R. 1), which would limit the number of bills each member could present to just five — silencing the voices of New Mexicans who want their voices heard in the legislative process. The committee tabled the bad legislation.

On Tuesday, in the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee (HCPAC), we had multiple bad bills (and some good bills) being heard, but Rep. Stefani Lord (R-Sandia Park) and I were repeatedly silenced by the chairwoman, Rep. Joanne Ferrary (D-Las Cruces), who tried to cut off Rep. Lord’s debate, continuously interrupted our lines of questioning and pushed all Republican bills to the bottom of the agenda. She then stymied debate on Rep. Jimmy Mason’s (R-Artesia) bill (H.B. 162), of which I am a cosponsor, and rolled all the other GOP bills we were supposed to have heard. After the meeting, I told the chairwoman that I would go to the speaker with these concerns, and she told me, “Yeah, good luck with that.”

On Wednesday, Rep. Lord and I addressed the full House of Representatives and told the speaker of this grievous abuse, asking him to talk with the HCPAC chairwoman.

In HGEIC on Wednesday, we heard H.B. 85, which is a really bad bill banning all so-called “non-functional” turf (like grass) from public medians and government buildings, forcing them to be replaced with “zeroscape.” This would apply to ALL state-funded projects, including in our cities and counties. These changes would cost our localities millions of dollars and would ban grass medians (such as on Juniper Drive in Alamogordo, where people use the medians to walk their dogs), and create inconveniences for all people — not to mention the budgetary process. It would also extend to projects, such as domestic violence shelters, that get state funding, making it even more detrimental to the state and to our district. Unfortunately, the terrible bill was advanced through the committee along party lines.

On Thursday, HCPAC met again, with many controversial bills on the agenda, including a good bill (H.B. 185) that would protect women’s sports from biological men being able to take titles away from women. It would have also protected these female athletes, who, in many cases, have been injured competing against biological men. During the discussion, Ferrary cut us off repeatedly while we asked questions, demanding we only ask questions and not make statements. However, when a Democrat representative read a 5-6 minute-long written statement, the chairwoman allowed it — blatant political discrimination against Rep. Lord and I because we are Republicans.

On Friday, I was forced to once again give another floor speech to the speaker asking for us to be treated equally and showed him the specific passages in the rules where we were not being given our equal voice in the committee — a disservice to the great people of our districts.

That morning in HGEIC, I voted against H.B. 252, which aimed to try to skirt around the anti-donation clause to give large checks to guardians of children (handouts) by working with foundations that would help match the grant. Although this might be worth doing in the private sector with fully private funding, I don’t believe it is the government’s role to intervene to administer the program. Also, the pilot program, which the bill references, only serves a handful of counties (none in southeast New Mexico), so that further cemented my opposition to the legislation.

On Saturday, I jumped between HGEIC and HCPAC, which both met that day, and we heard multiple bills, including H.B. 76, which would take away doctors’ authority to use their best judgment — forcing every newborn infant to have tests that would result in cardiac tests requiring airlifting to Albuquerque. Many physicians, including pediatric cardiologists in our district, opposed the bill, so I voted against it along with Rep. Lord.

We also heard in that committee H.B. 253, which aimed to seal eviction records after three years of the eviction, giving landlords less information when renting to new tenants who may have had evictions, even in the most grievous cases of past tenants using rentals for meth labs, causing damage (such as holes in the walls, ripping copper out of the pipes), or domestic violence situations, etc. Both Rep. Lord and I voted against it.

Another bill that was heard in the committee, H.B. 250, was to give free menstrual products to inmates, but the bill did not have important definitions and was very vague, so I voted against it. The chair rolled all the rest of the bills on the agenda (which so happened to all be Republican bills).

That afternoon and evening on the House floor, we debated the Democrats’ weak and ineffective “public safety” bill (H.B. 8), which will have little to no tangible effect on crime. We put forward our own substitute bill on the floor to give real solutions (such as addressing juvenile crime and increasing penalties for felons), but the Democrats rejected these ideas on mostly partisan votes. The House ultimately voted for the bill, with only 20 of us rejecting it (myself included), and the legislation now makes its way over to the Senate.

The week ahead will be very eventful in my committees, with lots of bad bills scheduled for the upcoming week. We are also set to debate legislation on the House floor, so watch for those agendas below.

Here are the legislative items that will come to the committees I am a member of:

To see all schedules for all committees and the House and Senate floors, click here.

To see the latest House committee calendar, which includes Zoom links to testify, click here.

To access all of my proposed legislation and the status of each bill, please click here.

It is an honor to represent Alamogordo in the Legislature and fight with every fiber of my being to protect our Constitutional rights. You can always count on me to stand with our shared conservative American values.

God bless you,
John

Rep. John Block
NM House District 51
Republican, Otero County

Week 4: Legislative update from Piñon Post editor and state Rep. John Block Read More »

As all other NM congressional Dems back Haaland, Heinrich refuses

30 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

New Mexico Senator Martin Heinrich chose not to endorse former Interior Secretary Deb Haaland in her newly announced campaign for governor, making him the only federally elected Democrat from New Mexico to withhold support so far. His decision comes just weeks after he ruled out running for the position himself.

Haaland’s campaign launch on Tuesday sparked a wave of endorsements from the state’s Democrat congressional delegation. Senator Ben Ray Luján, along with Representatives Melanie Stansbury, Teresa Leger Fernandez, and Gabe Vasquez, all quickly voiced their support. Their backing solidified Haaland’s strong standing within New Mexico’s Democrat leadership. However, Heinrich, who has successfully won statewide office three times and holds considerable influence in the state, remains the only major Democratic figure yet to publicly endorse her.

During an interview with POLITICO’s E&E News, Heinrich did not clarify whether he intends to back Haaland’s candidacy, offering only a vague response when asked about his plans. “If I do, I’ll let you know,” he remarked, leaving the possibility open.

Heinrich’s decision to stay neutral at this stage is notable, given his leadership role as the top Democrat on the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, a key position that shapes federal energy and environmental policy. His influence in New Mexico politics has grown significantly over the years, and an endorsement from him would carry considerable weight.

Haaland, who previously served as a U.S. representative before being appointed Interior Secretary by President Joe Biden, is making her bid for governor after her historic tenure as the first Native American to hold a cabinet-level position. Her candidacy quickly gained momentum with the backing of her former colleagues in Congress, reinforcing her ties to the state’s Democratic base.

Heinrich’s reluctance to immediately endorse her could suggest a variety of strategic considerations. He may be weighing other potential contenders in the race, assessing how Haaland’s campaign unfolds, or considering political dynamics within the state. His past decision to step aside from a gubernatorial run indicated that he was not seeking the office himself, but it remains unclear whether he will actively campaign for any candidate.

Given his track record of winning statewide elections and his seniority within the New Mexico delegation, Heinrich’s endorsement—or lack thereof—could influence the primary landscape. While he has not publicly opposed Haaland, his silence stands in contrast to the enthusiastic support she has received from the rest of the delegation.

As the gubernatorial race continues to take shape, Heinrich’s next moves will be closely watched. Whether he eventually endorses Haaland or remains on the sidelines, his decision could have implications for the party’s unity and the broader contest for New Mexico’s governorship.

As all other NM congressional Dems back Haaland, Heinrich refuses Read More »

Dems’ so-called ‘crime package’ sparks fury on all political sides

29 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

A proposed legislative package aimed at addressing crime in New Mexico is moving forward in the House despite concerns from lawmakers and advocacy groups about its effectiveness. House Bill 8, which encompasses six crime-related bills, has sparked debate over whether it strikes the right balance between public safety and criminal justice reform. The bill, now headed to the House floor, proposes tougher penalties for fentanyl trafficking, school shooting threats, and auto theft, as well as restrictions on firearm conversion devices. Additionally, it includes significant changes to the state’s criminal competency system, a move that has drawn both support and criticism.

Rep. Christine Chandler, D-Los Alamos, the bill’s sponsor, defended the package, stating, “This is in response to public interest and our commitment to the public to address crime swiftly. We are doing that through a collection of bills that I think are very meaningful.” She acknowledged that the package is not perfect but emphasized that it had been carefully crafted after months of work. “I felt that it was important to have bills where we got some consensus and we felt that people could get behind,” she added.

A key component of the bill focuses on reforming how New Mexico handles criminal defendants deemed incompetent to stand trial. The proposed changes would allow for mental health treatment for individuals accused of misdemeanors and low-level felonies who would otherwise be released without further intervention. Under the new system, non-dangerous defendants could be ordered into a 90-day community-based competency restoration program, or prosecutors could pursue involuntary civil commitment or assisted outpatient treatment. Chandler described this as a “balanced” and “compassionate” approach to addressing competency concerns.

Public defenders and legal experts, however, have raised questions about the practical implementation of these reforms. Second Judicial District Defender Dennica Torres expressed skepticism, noting that while the changes may be beneficial in theory, the state lacks the behavioral health infrastructure to support them effectively. “Do we have the staff? Do we have the evaluators? Do we have the attorneys? Do we have enough judges?” she asked, emphasizing the logistical challenges of implementing the proposed measures.

Opposition to HB 8 has come from multiple angles. Republican lawmakers have argued that the package does not go far enough in addressing crime, particularly juvenile crime. Rep. Nicole Chavez, R-Albuquerque, criticized the package for not imposing harsher penalties on young offenders. “I don’t think this package is going to address crime as far as what I think it needs to do,” said Rep. Andrea Reeb, R-Clovis, after voting against the bill.

Meanwhile, the Public Safety Coalition, which includes 11 organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union of New Mexico, condemned the bill, stating that it would lead to unnecessary incarceration and forced psychiatric treatment. “This so-called public safety package is not going to achieve actual safety; it will only create new crimes, lengthen sentences, and use the criminal legal system to force people into psychiatric facilities that have yet to be built,” the coalition said in a statement. Lana Weber, interim director of public policy for the ACLU of New Mexico, echoed this sentiment, arguing that coerced care and forced hospitalization often worsen the very issues they aim to resolve.

Some lawmakers also objected to the bundling of multiple crime-related proposals into a single package, a practice that has been used in past legislative sessions. Rep. Matthew McQueen, D-Galisteo, voiced concerns about being asked to vote on a collection of bills with varying degrees of support. “There are lots of elements of this that I support; there’s at least one that I don’t. And I’m just troubled by that,” he said. Despite his reservations, McQueen ultimately voted to advance the package but noted that he may reconsider his stance when it reaches the House floor.

Chandler acknowledged that the bill will need to work alongside efforts to expand New Mexico’s behavioral health system. The Senate is currently advancing a separate package of bills that would establish a $1 billion trust fund, allocate $140 million in immediate funding, and implement a regional planning process for behavioral health services. While these measures could help address concerns about infrastructure shortages, some lawmakers worry they won’t be enough. “I think there’ll still be a little bit of an unmet need, but that will just accelerate our interest in developing a mental health program,” Chandler said.

As the debate continues, House Speaker Javier Martínez, D-Albuquerque, indicated that HB 8 could be up for a vote in the coming days. While proponents see the package as a necessary step toward improving public safety, critics remain concerned about its long-term consequences. “This isn’t the end. This is obviously just the start. But I think it’s a really good start,” Chandler said, underscoring the importance of ongoing discussions to refine the state’s approach to crime and mental health.

Dems’ so-called ‘crime package’ sparks fury on all political sides Read More »

Arrest warrants might just start flying at Dems in NM

47 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

New Mexico’s Democrat elected officials may soon find themselves in legal jeopardy for obstructing federal law enforcement efforts to protect the nation’s borders. An internal memo from the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) indicates that state and local officials who interfere with immigration enforcement could face criminal prosecution.

The document makes it clear that federal prosecutors are being instructed to identify and potentially charge those who “threaten to impede” federal immigration actions. This could mean serious legal consequences for public officials in sanctuary cities like Santa Fe and Albuquerque, where local authorities have actively refused to cooperate with immigration enforcement.

“It’s hard on people when there is an atmosphere of fear and unknown action,” said Alan Webber, the mayor of Santa Fe. However, his city’s policies of shielding illegal immigrants from federal enforcement may now carry serious legal risks.

Mayor Webber admitted, “I don’t know any mayor is in a position, including me, to say that we are going to refuse to comply with the law. But I don’t know if we are required to assist with things that go beyond our legal responsibilities.”

The DOJ’s directive raises serious questions about whether officials like Webber and Albuquerque Mayor Tim Keller could be subject to arrest warrants for their defiance of federal law. Keller, in a statement, seemed to double down on resistance:

“As your Mayor, I was elected to lead our city, not work for Donald Trump… APD officers will continue to arrest violent and repeat offenders, regardless of immigration status.”

Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham also weighed in, appearing to reject the DOJ’s position, stating, “I expect New Mexico’s public officials to uphold the Constitution and their duties under law, and not be swayed or intimidated by politically motivated threats.”

New Mexico’s Attorney General, Raúl Torrez, dismissed the DOJ’s warning, calling it a distortion of the law and an attack on state and local officials. His position raises further concerns about whether he and other high-ranking state officials could be complicit in efforts to obstruct federal immigration enforcement.

Sam Bregman, the district attorney for Bernalillo County, took an even more defiant stance, outright refusing to cooperate with federal immigration efforts:

“In my roles as District Attorney as well as the Chairman of the OCC, I will continue to vigorously work with all agencies to go after criminals in our state. However, I will in no way assist with the recent executive orders involving immigration.”

These statements, combined with the DOJ’s new directive, highlight the increasing legal risks facing New Mexico’s Democrat officials. If they continue to shield illegal immigrants and block federal law enforcement from carrying out its duty, they could very well find themselves facing warrants for their arrests. The coming weeks may determine whether New Mexico’s leadership chooses to comply with federal law or risk legal action for their defiance.

Arrest warrants might just start flying at Dems in NM Read More »

Teachers’ union rips MLG over latest incendiary comments

6 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

In a recent development, the American Federation of Teachers New Mexico (AFT NM) has openly criticized Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham for her remarks concerning educators serving in the state legislature. 

The governor reportedly described it as “unethical and a huge conflict of interest” for current and former educators to vote on education-related matters, suggesting that such individuals have hindered educational reforms. She was quoted saying, “You’ve got a lot of former educators and superintendents who aren’t interested in changing anything.”

In response, AFT NM expressed profound disappointment, emphasizing the value of educators’ firsthand experience in legislative processes. The union stated, “Lawmaking and policy work take teamwork and trust, not criticism.”

This incident is not the first instance of tension between the governor and educators. Previously, the National Education Association of New Mexico (NEA-NM) opposed a state rule mandating a 180-day school year, which was set to take effect on July 1, 2024. 

NEA-NM President Mary Parr-Sánchez voiced concerns that the rule would drive educators out of the profession and erode local control over school calendars. She remarked, “There is a great majority of people that believe that would not be in the best interest of children, because it’s going to drive educators out of the field.” 

The rule faced significant opposition from educators and administrators, leading to legal challenges. In February 2025, a New Mexico district judge ruled that the Public Education Department’s mandate for a 180-day instructional calendar was unlawful and unenforceable. The court found that the department had exceeded its authority and that the rule conflicted with existing state laws, which emphasize local flexibility in meeting instructional hour requirements. 

These events highlight ongoing debates in New Mexico regarding the balance between state mandates and local control in educational policy and the executive’s ability to keep her former supporters (such as teachers’ unions) in her camp as her tenure as governor wanes. 

Teachers’ union rips MLG over latest incendiary comments Read More »

Week 3: Legislative update from Piñon Post editor and state Rep. John Block

3 Comments / New Mexico, News, Opinion, Politics / By

A legislative update from Piñon Post founder and editor and state Rep. John Block (R-Alamogordo). John gives a weekly update during the legislative session. If you don’t already get the update, you can get it here or by subscribing on the website JohnForNM.com.

This week has been another wild one at the Roundhouse. Here’s what happened:

To watch my summary of what happened this week, please click here or on the thumbnail below, and you can follow along in the video with the below information:

On Monday, in the House Government, Elections, and Indian Affairs Committee (HGEIAC), I voted against an extremist resolution (H.J.R. 3), also known as the “Gren Amendment. ” The bill would make cities and counties liable and open to lawsuits if anyone perceives air or water as not being “clean. ” According to the bill’s fiscal impact report, the state and localities could be exposed to up to $1.6 billion in frivolous litigation.

On Tuesday, in the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee (HCPAC), the committee voted unanimously to pass H.B. 73, which removes statutes of limitations on child sexual abuse civil cases, and H.B. 83, which increases penalties for sex trafficking (and increases ages in the statutes from 16 to 18 to ensure kids up to 18 are protected). I voted against H.B. 89, which lets illegal immigrants get graduate-level scholarships at UNM. A bill sponsored by myself and Rep. Stefani Lord (R-Sandia Park) to institute Constitutional Carry was tabled on a 4-2 vote without discussion from the Democrats on the committee.

On Wednesday, Democrats passed through HGEIAC H.B. 98, which automatically expunges eviction records after five years (which will give landlords less information, especially if the eviction was due to violence, damage, or other grave circumstances), and H.B. 108, establishing “the Statewide Public Health and Climate Program within the Department of Health,” both of which I opposed.

On Thursday, Rep. Lord and I helped pass bills through HCPAC to give police officers equal rights as civilians (H.B. 103) and allow law enforcement to carry firearms at polling places (H.B. 101).

On Friday, in HGEIAC, H.B. 16, to implement “increased sentencing for individuals convicted of trafficking controlled substances under Section 30-31-20 NMSA 1978 when the offense involves fentanyl,” passed the committee despite three Democrats opposing the measure.

On Saturday, I bounced between my two committees (which were inconveniently meeting at the same time). Democrats killed bills in HCPAC to increase penalties for drug traffickers (H.B. 107), including resulting in death from trafficked drugs and adding “fentanyl to methamphetamine, where now knowing or intentional exposure to either of these two drugs [to children] would represent prima facie evidence of child abuse” (H.B. 136).

In HGEIAC on that day, Democrats passed H.J.R. 5, which changes the Children, Youth, and Families Department to a commission under the governor and legislative branches, but it does not equally distribute representation, so I voted against it. Another bill I voted against in that committee was H.B. 6, which forces a “prevailing wage” on projects done through industrial revenue bonds (IRBs), which would skyrocket the cost of these projects (which are funded by private dollars anyway).

The week ahead will be very eventful in my committees, with lots of bad bills scheduled for the upcoming week. And nightly floor sessions are also scheduled to begin hearing legislation on the floor, so please be on the alert for those as well.

Here are the legislative items that will come to the committees I am a member of:

To see all committee schedules for all committees and the House/Senate floors, click here.

Click here to see the latest committee calendar, which includes Zoom links to testify.

To access all of my proposed legislation and the status of each bill, please click here.

It is an honor to represent Alamogordo in the Legislature. I will fight to protect our constitutional rights with every fiber of my being. You can always count on me to support our shared conservative American values.

God bless you,
John

Rep. John Block
NM House District 51
Republican, Otero County

Week 3: Legislative update from Piñon Post editor and state Rep. John Block Read More »

Dems vote against legislation targeting fentanyl trafficking, exposure to kids

8 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

On Friday, New Mexico Democrat leaders in the state House Government, Elections, and Indian Affairs Committee voted against a measure sponsored by Rep. Charlotte Little (D-Albuquerque) to mandate “increased sentencing for individuals convicted of trafficking controlled substances under Section 30-31-20 NMSA 1978 when the offense involves fentanyl.”

The bill passed the committee on a 6-3 vote, although it would have died if Republicans didn’t save it with their votes. Reps. Janelle Anyanonu (D-Albuquerque), Tara Lujan (D-Albuquerque), and Reena Szczepanski (D-Santa Fe, Democrat Floor Leader) voted against the measure, some opposing it on the grounds that it could increase “incarceration.” 

On Saturday, Democrats in the House Consumer and Public Affairs Committee tabled bills sponsored by Rep. Andrea Reeb (R-Clovis) that would increase penalties for drug traffickers (H.B. 107), including resulting in death from trafficked drugs and adding “fentanyl to methamphetamine, where now knowing or intentional exposure to either of these two drugs [to children] would represent prima facie evidence of child abuse” (H.B. 136).

The Democrats in the committee voted against the legislation, with Reps. Joann Ferrary (D-Las Cruces-Committee Chair), Angelica Rubio (D-Las Cruces-Committee Vice Chair), Liz Thomson (D-Albuquerque), and Andrea Romero (D-Santa Fe) opposing the measures, although Romero was absent for the last bill’s vote. Both votes in the committee killed the bills, with Reps. John Block (R-Alamogordo) and Stefani Lord (R-Sandia Park) voting against tabling the life-saving legislation. 

Ferrary claimed that since fentanyl, which is rarely prescribed, is technically a legal substance, it should not be included. Rubio claimed (wrongly) that since a drug addict who breastfeeds her baby could be charged under H.B. 136, she couldn’t support the legislation.

Despite Democrats being sponsors or co-sponsors of the legislation, Democrats still rejected the legislation, despite statistics showing that 65% of drug deaths in the state are due to fentanyl, per the New Mexico Department of Health, and New Mexico being the state with the eight-most drug-related deaths, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Two milligrams of fentanyl is enough to kill someone, the Drug Enforcement Administration notes. 

Two milligrams of fentanyl on pencil tip. A lethal dose for most people. US Drug Enforcement Administration: “2mg, the amount on the tip of this pencil, can be enough to kill an average American.” United States Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA).

Rep. Little’s bill now goes to the House Judiciary Committee, while Reeb’s bills remain on the table in the Consumer and Public Affairs Committee. 

Editor’s note: A previous version of this article incorrectly listed the party affiliations of certain legislators, but those changes have been updated.

Dems vote against legislation targeting fentanyl trafficking, exposure to kids Read More »

MLG’s power grab comes back to bite—Now she’s begging for ‘moderates’

28 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

Far-left Democrat Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham is taking aim at lawmakers in her own party as her agenda on crime and education struggles to gain traction in the first quarter of the legislative session. Expressing frustration, she criticized legislators for failing to take decisive action on key issues and accused them of being too risk-averse to address the state’s problems.

Lujan Grisham singled out public safety as an area where she believes lawmakers have fallen short. She argued that violent crime is a statewide issue, not just an Albuquerque problem, pointing to rising crime rates in cities like Las Cruces, Santa Fe, Alamogordo, and Raton. The governor pushed for mandatory sentencing for certain crimes and blamed some judges for failing to keep criminals off the streets under discretionary sentencing. Despite calling a special session on crime last year, most of her proposals went nowhere, leaving her frustrated with the Legislature’s inaction. She insisted that lawmakers need to be more aggressive in tackling crime rather than remaining politically cautious.

Some legislators have pushed back against the idea that increasing penalties will reduce crime. Senator Joseph Cervantes, chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, recently stated that enforcement and accountability, rather than new laws, are what’s missing. Pretrial detention has remained a controversial issue since New Mexico moved away from a money-based bail system in 2016. While the governor has pointed to repeat offenders being released and committing new crimes, studies from the University of New Mexico indicate that most individuals released pretrial do not reoffend. Still, Lujan Grisham defended her push for stricter measures, arguing that longer jail sentences prevent criminals from engaging in more wrongdoing.

In addition to crime policy, Lujan Grisham expressed frustration with how public education funding is handled. She claimed there is a lack of transparency in how more than $4 billion in state funds are spent and that her administration has little power over school districts. 

She also took a direct swipe at the House and Senate education committees, which are both led by current or retired teachers, saying they have stalled meaningful reform efforts. “You’ve got a lot of former educators and superintendents who aren’t interested in changing anything,” she said.

She described it as “unethical and a huge conflict of interest” for educators to be making decisions on education policy and funding while serving in the Legislature.

Representative G. Andrés Romero, chairman of the House Education Committee, rejected the governor’s criticism, arguing that having teachers in the Legislature provides valuable firsthand experience. He defended his role, saying his time in the classroom informs his legislative decisions, and expressed disappointment that the governor views it as a conflict.

As the legislative session continues, tensions between Lujan Grisham and lawmakers appear to be escalating. She blamed progressive members for being too entrenched in their positions, arguing that New Mexico needs more moderate leadership. 

“Maybe we need more pragmatic, moderate people (in elected office), because you can’t govern on the fringes or the extremes, which is how New Mexico got into a lot of these problems,” said Lujan Grisham. 

Ironically, the governor worked overtime to primary challenge more moderate members of her party because they did not fall in lockstep with her radical agenda on banning guns, having abortions up to the date of birth, and reckless spending. She helped take out the moderate former Senate President Pro-Tem, the chairman of the Senate Finance Committee, the chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, the chairman of the Legislative Veterans and Military Affairs Committee, and rank-and-file representatives and senators from across the state. In another turn of irony, these same moderate legislators would have helped pass her crime agenda, but now they are replaced by radical progressives. 

MLG’s power grab comes back to bite—Now she’s begging for ‘moderates’ Read More »

In embarrassing blow to MLG, judge strikes down overreaching education rule

25 Comments / New Mexico, News, Politics / By

Far-left Democrat Gov. Michelle Lujan Grisham’s New Mexico Public Education Department’s (PED) proposed “180-day rule” has been officially struck down. Fifth Judicial District Judge Dustin Hunter ruled on Monday that the department’s mandate for all public school districts and charter schools to implement a 180-day instructional calendar “does not align with the Legislature’s clear intention.”

“The PED lacks the authority to implement a rule mandating a minimum number of instructional days for public school districts and charter schools,” Hunter stated in his decision.

The ruling comes after over a year of opposition from school administrators, educators, and lawmakers who challenged the agency’s authority to impose such a requirement.

The controversy began in May 2024, when a coalition of New Mexico school superintendents filed a lawsuit against NMPED, arguing that the mandate constituted “executive overreach.” The lawsuit, backed by over 50 school districts, claimed that enforcing a 180-day school calendar would eliminate four-day school weeks, which are widely used in rural communities.

Stan Rounds, executive director of the New Mexico School Superintendents Association, previously warned that under the new rule, “If you do a four-day week under the new rule, you essentially will have to go to school about 49 of those 52 weeks.”

Superintendent Johnna Bruhn of Mosquero Municipal Schools voiced concerns about the logistical and financial burdens the rule would impose. “The issue is, it’s going to be an increase in travel time and an increase in costs and an increase in the burden on the students and the staff,” Bruhn explained.

Parents and community members also objected to the change. Ronald Dixon, a grandparent of students in Grady, opposed the extended schedule, saying, “I just totally object to it because they don’t give the kids an opportunity to rest, as well as the teachers, and give everybody a break.”

Despite widespread opposition, NMPED defended the 180-day mandate, citing improved student performance in districts that voluntarily adopted extended calendars. Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham also backed the policy, arguing that increasing instructional days would help boost academic outcomes across the state.

However, the court ultimately rejected the department’s arguments, ruling that the mandate conflicted with a state law passed in 2023, which sets instructional requirements at 1,140 hours per year but does not specify a required number of school days.

In his ruling, Judge Hunter emphasized that the Legislature, not the Public Education Department, holds the power to set educational policies. He also pointed to the repeal of a 2009 law that originally established a 180-day requirement, noting that lawmakers had intentionally chosen not to reinstate such a mandate.

Furthermore, the judge highlighted that PED delayed implementing the rule for over a decade, suggesting that even the department had doubts about its own authority. This delay was acknowledged in a December communication to the Legislative Finance Committee.

As a result, the court issued a preliminary injunction, preventing the enforcement of the 180-day requirement and directing NMPED to approve school budgets that comply with existing legal standards.

The court has given both parties ten days to submit additional findings supporting the decision. A scheduling discussion has also been set for Wednesday at 1:00 p.m. to address the case’s next steps.

With the ruling now in place, New Mexico school districts can continue operating under their current calendars without being forced to adopt a longer school year.

In embarrassing blow to MLG, judge strikes down overreaching education rule Read More »

1 2 3 4 5 6 … 223

Stay Updated