Dem lawyers argue against ‘democracy’ to defend gerrymandered maps in court

On Monday, the New Mexico Supreme Court heard arguments on a lawsuit brought by the Republican Party of New Mexico and other plaintiffs regarding the Democrats’ extremely partisan gerrymandered congressional map that resulted in Republicans losing representation in the state’s Second Congressional District. The case is 

On the side of Democrat Gov. Lujan Grisham, Secretary of State Maggie Toulouse Oliver, and others, attorney Sara N. Sanchez argued that the state Supreme Court had absolutely no right to rule on the case, claiming they had no legal authority even in “extreme” cases.

She said, “Given the fact that there are no binding standards, then yes, Even in the extreme case, that is not justiciable by the court unless until New Mexico adopts a constitutional amendment, legislaton, something that it provides that almost half of the other states have seen fit to do that provides a check on that process.”

Justice Briana H. Zamora said, “I’m concerned with barring forever, assuming there’s no statutory or constitutional amendments, claims of this nature, even in the most egregious cases because we obviously recognizing it’s political, I think the dissent in Rucho recognizes it’s political. But for the really egregious extreme cases to ever bar a claim is concerning to me,” referring to the U.S. Supreme Court case Rucho v. Common Cause

“If this court remands for further fact-finding, discovery, etc., we could engage in that all until the cows come home, but it’s not going to change the fact of what this map does and what the plaintiffs are complaining about,” claimed Sanchez.

She then requested, “I would urge the court to consider that it would be the type of decision that would call for a heightened pleading standard where what is being presented shocks the conscience, is of such an extreme nature,” adding, “I would request such a high bar if the court decides to go in that direction.” 

Justice Michael E. Vigil asked regarding diluting citizens’ votes, “Isn’t that the very antithesis of what a democracy is?” 

The Democrats’ other attorney, Holly Agajanian, representing Lujan Grisham, argued strangely against democracy. She said, “Just because something is considered anti-democratic doesn’t mean the court has to step in. And I know that doesn’t feel right based on what everything we think justice is. It feels funny for me to say that. But at the end of the day, the fact of the matter is that’s the case. Because in our system of government… These anti-democratic effects we see can only be remedied through the legislature.” 

Attorney for the plaintiffs, Daniel J. Gallegos, argued the maps drawn by the Democrat legislature are a “violation of the state’s equal protection clause,” citing the Legislature throwing out all the maps proposed by the Citizens Redistricting Committee and instead drawing their own hyper-partisan map.

Gallegos referred to other evidence, including soon-to-be former House Speaker Brian Egolf (D-Santa Fe) and other lawmakers blatantly bragging about how this map would help Democrats and harm Republicans. These arguments, as well as the communities of interest “cracked” in parts, violates citizens’ rights via “vote dilution.”

Right before 3:00 p.m., the court adjourned, with Chief Justice C. Shannon Bacon saying the Court would need time to deliberate before coming back with a decision, citing no extreme time constraints. However, Bacon said, “We will get you the outcome as soon as practicable.”

Advertisements

13 thoughts on “Dem lawyers argue against ‘democracy’ to defend gerrymandered maps in court”

      1. You mean, decades of buying votes. And let’s not forget that our current governor is descended from territorial slave traders. If our voting was so above board and so honest, why did Maggie Screwloose Oliver refuse to allow the release of voter data when asked by Trump? Interestingly, the states that refused to comply are those that have had crooked voting for decades. She essentially didn’t allow the Big Boss to look at data that they already have from the tax and census rolls but was more than OK allowing TrueTheVote and other 3rd parties access to it. The only “nefarious purposes” she is concerned with are the ones that she engineers herself.

        https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/trump-commission-requested-voter-data-heres-every-state-saying

  1. If you think the DNC led NMSC will overturn what the DNC of NM did in this rewrite, that guarantees the DNC winning every election henceforth, I’ve got Pacific coast ocean front property off the state line of Montana and Idaho I’ll sell you for 11.8 million…Euros… upfront…No cash back, no refunds, deposit the cash first, then I’ll get you the property deed. Even the DNC led attorneys are fighting saying it don’t matter if it was undemocratic…or communist, or socialism, or run by a dictator… Equal protection of the law clauses can be ignored as long as it favors the DNC. Yes it was political… but the DNC doesn’t give a rats behind about what anyone thinks…as long as it favors the DNC. Fools keep voting for it…this is what we get outta voting them fools voting for it..

    Next step, gun control. Removing the ability to defend yourself from an oppressive government is tantamount to insuring the DNC retains power.

    Red Flag your neighbor through a police state. “Civil property seizure warrants” issued without defendants presence or knowledge, issued in secrete, then, removing all weapons, ammunition, the ability to have a magazine, cause the defendant to pay an enormous amount of fines and attorney fees to try to get them back and fail for the first year, then an outright refusal to return them by the DNC led courts, next step, imprisonment for those refusing to comply. Then… when the prison’s run out of rooms, Tent cities, with limited food supplies and forced labor located behind concertina wire. Then there will be “Assigned Tent Captains” who report non compliance by the “Tents Occupiers” and the “Tent Captain” will be rewarded with an extra food ration, and finally… reinstitute railroad box cars that are a one way trips to the slaughter houses probably in Texas initially until the forced labor here can build gas chambers and slaughter houses…Exactly what happened under Hitler… except NM only has about 1,000,000 people to slaughter instead of 6 million Jews.

    We are at the tip of falling into a huge fiasco…and elections had consequences..

    “From my cold dead hands”…(Charlton Hesston) Will be the rally cry of the boxcar residents too late to cry for anything else but food and warm shelter… and the NMSP will be the lead enforcers at the Governors whims and demands to do her bidding.

    Better turn the page NM…

  2. Oh yeah peasants how dare thee challenge the piglet and her loyal harem!! The supreme court has the authority and the LAW behind them!

      1. I love how Dems snipe at Susana Martinez! The few times when Republicans governed the state are the only times when we were prosperous and the average citizen was able to get ahead. The “pizza party incident” is one that people like you love to bring up. A $700 pizza party has nothing on buying jewelry during lockdowns, getting fat on buying luxury groceries with taxpayer money, taking money from Soros and pushing useless “vaccines” and masking on the public while prolonging a manufactured emergency for federal disaster money. Speaking of Martinez, she left office with a surplus that the piglet blew in 6 months with nothing to show for it. Should I keep going?

  3. Willy boy you are on the wrong news site if you want to continue to argue the truth. Why do you bother? Like I’ve said before folks like you get on this site just to gnash your teeth at the God-fearing patriots.

  4. I like the statement: “You are on the wrong news site if you want to continue to argue the truth.” So So true!!! LOL. and…gnash your teeth at the God-fearing patriots- To bad, we have separation of church and state for a reason.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *